Jib gat αν 
πε 
ΟΝ 


ἣν ἀν εἶ 
νον εἰν pet tet τὸ δὲ οὶ ars 
ites J SIS 


A ASA: 


REY 
ae ee a 


* 
Peep 
᾿ 


pte ᾿ te ry ἐ 
᾽ Fit vor ee pb gs gle a eee Sb gerne elena py pate: 
trys er ᾿ Terre} eHivoreerys 

i A vey a Ae eae KP res ge phy ΟΣ 

ery eee ΄ τ ᾿ AK BAe BAAR A SRA 
rey tye v9.9 POE 


Sey tee 
«Κα 

τευ τυ ον. 
᾿ Ὑ μον ete ΣΟ ΑΝ δ εἶ 
ν ¥ : 
SHRM Ree eo gate ; Per ptt of sa? 
Vivre re Ὁ ᾽ ae ὃ Spates 


ἀκ, 
gee eee yy eg e see a gee Hees 
ELH νον ἡ 
ΟΜ τὰ τι δ φῦ 
πού κί ζαδοι 
oalatatan te 


kes 
pee eee 
OO 
τ ν᾿ οἰ κοὐ ν᾽ 
ἢ BOS . 
PSs es hey 

᾿ ΧΟ ΧΧ ΧΟ 
reer ye yee 

ry trey n> 
ἌΧ Χ ΣΟ 

. 


ἜΧΟΝ 
“ ‘ nee ihe 
KAS vores very rere wee PP etgteratet tet ahy 
BESAEAEK SA We Veet SHEE 
iets ΧΑ Ge ee eg Te! ᾿ ΣῊ ΩΝ 

BO OCC Ck ΑΚ, εἶν εἰ; Ὁ OOOOH EM Ce 
κα Pe ats palette areata tel : 
oer eee aay epee h ΟΝ ΝΣ ΠΟ ete οὐοῖς ΣῈ tatyte : Ὗ Δ γίννς 
ΧΑ ΣΝ ΟΣ, ve OK TC ; κι δα πα PAN 
ray Deets ΕΣ ; 
᾿ COG ete OCR OKO 
ASABE K 
EOC SCM SCE MIRE 
of eT a 
Heeler ete ΚΑ ΚΑ ΧΉΙ 
ee eee 
; 
᾿ 


See οὑξ ὑζ εν ἘΝ 
ἀπ WE 


BS 
ist Wales 
areata 
Pei ere yee 
Beet εἶν 7 
7 ἐπ yy Ὑ 
rey a x «ὡς 
ἧς ve Teletets! 
fe 
ὃ ΟΣ 
Cerne) 
Deere 
es 
iti? 
Perera γ᾽ 
COHEN δεν εν 
κ acerca! 


εἶν 

ΣῊΝ 

Ore) 
Goi: 


é 
φ᾿ 


Σοῦ 
τ Ἤν εἰν εν 
Ἐν é fy 
ἀκ ἐκ vere 
Were ye ears - 
Sade 
εἶν Paty ary 
ν + 
vbr BO ἊΝ 


ΚΑ; 
τον RAR 


A OOOO OX 
re. Oe 

Eee ye ee ᾿ 

τ oe ey 


"Henne 


ἣ Otte 

oe ty sty ἀρᾷ 

᾿ ety MASA SA Aes .Ἵ 
* 

va 

oe at 

Shee 


ΠΣ νῶν 
ie hee 
ὅν δι ἐκ ὸ ὃν δ᾽ δ ἢ 
ΝΣ 


τἰ εἶ εἰ 

Te Me μὲ 

wey ee ' 
SEOCODDOO OOO 
PoE SE τιν 4 eS 


εν 
BORO δ ott 


eet) ΧΆ ΧᾺΣ > ᾿ BOON : 
Peete oe es > ἥ ὙΥῊΝΝ 
COE OC) ᾿ SS on 5 
τὴν 
Dee eer ed ee 
BEOOO ORO 
COOOR OOO 
OOO ee 
we ροοδα 


ἘΜ. 
DOCU McK ΜΝ ΣΝ 
TEP RENO eh es 

’ 


CODECS 
OC 
bbe eh 
Des 


ΣΝ 
Fete i 


ee 
Oe) 


) Vee ee ek 
Oe ὟΣ DOCK or} . 
ΧΩ εν ae να ΜῊ ey be ae aye. bee 
Se er a 
DOG OCD 
ΧΆ IIE ts 
eer 


vee ὃ 
: See oS wy a velee a ae ere 
CSCS NE DIET HIN nay Rode es δῶ 
A SERS 
μὴν Sete 


ΧΟ 
ΟΣ Ὁ 


+ 


“ ts 
GC) 


eer ars » 
OCR 


Boss HSS SS 
heees $s OGOte 
ratte tae erate is 

coe oe + 


inv Sear hs b 
CECE Le εἷς Oo 
ee ele ea τ οἶος 8 ΟΣ 
εὐ ον he tt Ὁ ΟΣ Ware yeah ee eee 
: CeCe δ δ Oe 


> 
εἰν ᾿ DO 
SON WCC OE Se ST > Woes 
IE IE SCN S . RaSr tate 
> tata’ 

eye 
αι δον να ar 
+ Rt 


LIBRARY OF THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY 
PRINCETON. N. J. 


PRESENTED BY 
4 


‘ Ἶ Ὁ a | > a ᾿Ξ 
The Widow οἵ lneorce J e/a |S 
Division. 1) se. 


Section... Le | 


ceo Ἂς ΡΝ; 
SR 4: Ay 
ἌΣ ΩΝ 


ΓΝ, 
“4... 


Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2010 with funding from 
Princeton Theological Seminary Library 


http://www.archive.org/details/generalintroduct141 elli 


rer 8 «yi " 
μι ἀντ 
APs a a 


COMMENTARY δὰ; 


ON THE 


HOLY SCRIPTURES: 


ORITICAL, DOCTRINAL, AND HOMILETICAL. 


WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO MINISTERS AND STUDENTS 


BY 


JOHN PETER’ LANGE, Ὁ. Ὁ. 


ORDINARY PROFESSOR OF THEOLOGY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF BONN, 


( CONNECTION WITH A NUMBER OF EMINENT EUROPEAN DIVINES 
TRANSLATED, ENLARGED, AND EDITED 


BY 


Eee SC ELA BE > Dey 


PROFESSOR OF THEOLOGY IN THE UNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY. NEW YORK, 
IM OONNECTION WITH AMERICAN SCHOLARS OF VARIOUS EVANGELICAL DENOMINATIONS. 


VO!V,OME XIV. OF THE OLD TESTAMENT: CONTAINING THE MINOR PROPHETS! 


NEW YORK: 
CHARLES SCRIBNER’S SONS, 
1899 


BPAVASTA 4. ἅ] 


Ἴ ‘ 
: 


i 


OE τὸ EVITA 


Cr ta PR MANOR 


. ἢ ᾿ 
Mau. ΤῊΝ 
Cc ν 


SCOP AMINO 


erm 


* 


; £ 
shel Oi OA aS 


j 


THE 


MINOR PROPHETS. 


EXEGETICALLY, THEOLOGICALLY. AND HOMILETICALLY 


EXPOUNDED 


BY 


PAUL KLEINERT, OTTO SCHMOLLER, 
GEORGE R. BLISS, TALBOT W. CHAMBERS, CHARLES ELLICTT, 
SOHN FORSYTH, J. FREDERICK McCURDY, AND 
JOSEPH PACKARD. 


EDITED BY 


PHILIP SCHAFF, Ὁ. Ὁ. 


NEW YORK: 
CHARLES SCRIBNER’S SONS, 
1399 


Mastered according to Act of Congress. in the vear 1874, oy 
ScCRIBNER, ARMSTRONG, AND COMPANY, 
tj the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washingtos. 


Trow’s 
PRINTING AND BookBINDING COMPANY, 
205-213 East 12th St., 
NEW YORK. 


PREFACE BY THE GENERAL EDITOR 


THE volume on the Minor Propuets is partly in advance of the German original, 
which has not yet reached the three post-exilian Prophets. The commentaries on the nine 
earlier Prophets by Professors KLEINERT and SCHMOLLER appeared in separate numbers 
some time ago!; but for Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, Dr. Lange has not, to this date, 
been able to secure a suitable co-laborer.? With his cordial approval I deem it better to 
complete the volume by original commentaries than indefinitely to postpone the publication. 
They were prepared by sound and able scholars, in conformity with the plan of the whole 
work. 

The volume accordingly contains the following parts, each one being paged separately : — 

1. A GENERAL INTRODUCTION to the PRopHETS, especially the Minor Propuets, by 
Rev. Coarues Exiott, D. D., Professor of Biblical Exegesis in Chicago, Illinois. The 
general introductions of Kleinert and Schmoller are too brief and incomplete for our purpose, 
and therefore I requested Dr. ELL1oTT to prepare an independent essay on the subject. 

2. Hosta. By Rev. Dr. Orro ScumoxtiEeR. Translated from the German and en- 
larged by JAMES FREDERICK McCurpy, M. A., of Princeton, N. J. 

3. Jort. By ΟΥΤΟ Scumoutuer. Translated and enlarged by Rev. Joun ForsytTH, 
D. D., LL. D., Chaplain and Professor of Ethics and Law in the United States Military 
Academy, West Point, N. Y. 

4. Amos. By Orro ScumMorier. Translated and enlarged by Rev. Tatsot Ἢ 
Cuamsenrs, D. D., Pastor of the Collegiate Reformed Dutch Church, New York. 

5. ΟΒΑΡΙΑΗ. By Rev. Paut KLEINERT, Professor of Old Testament Theology in the 
University of Berlin. Translated and enlarged by Rev. GrorcE R. Buss, D. D., Professor 
in the University of Lewisburg, Pennsylvania. 

6. JonaH. By Prof. Paut KieInert, of the University of Berlin. Translated and en- 
larged by Rev. CHaries Exxiort, Professor of Biblical Exegesis in Chicago.® 

7. MicaH. By Prof. Paut KLEernert, of Berlin, and Prof. GzorGs R. Briss, of Lewis- 
burg. 

8. Nagum. By Prof. Paut Kuiernert, of Berlin, and Prof. Caartxes ELurortt, of 
Chicago. 

9. HABAKKUK. By Professors KLEINERT and ELLIOTT. 


1 Obadjah, Jonah, Micha, Nahum, Habakuk, Zephanjah. Wissenshaftlich und fiir den Gebrauch der Kirche ausgelegt com 
Paut ΚΙΕΙΝΕΕΤ, Pfarrer zu St. Gertraud und a. Professor an der Universitat zu Berlin. Bielefeld τι. Leipzig, 1868. — Dis 
Propheten Hosea, Joel und Amos. Theologisch-homiletisch bearbeitet von Orto SoHMOLLER, Licent. der Theologie, Diaconus 
tm Urach. Bielef. und Leipzig, 1872. 

2 The commentary of Rev. W. ῬΒΕΒΒΕΙ, on these three Prophets (Die nachexilischen Propheten, Gotha, 1870) was 
originally prepared for Lange’s Bible-work, but was rejected by Dr. Lange mainly on account of Pressel’s views on the 
genuineness and integrity of Zechariah. It was, however, independently published, and was made use of, like other 
eommentaries, by the authors of the respective sections in this volume. 

8 Dr. Elliott desires to render his acknowledgments to the Rey. Reuben Dederick, of Chicago, amd the Rev. Jacob 
Lotke, of Faribault, Minnesota, for valuable assistance in translating some difficult passages in Kleinert*s Commentaries 
on Jonah, Nahum, and Habakkuk. 


vi PREFACE BY THE GENERAL EDIT@(R. 


10. ZEPHANIAH. By Professors KLEINERT and ELLiort. 

11, Hacear. By James Freprrick McCourpy, M. A., Princeton, N. J. 

12. ΖΕΟΗΑΒΙΑΗ. By Rev. Tatsor W. Cuampers, Ὁ. D., New York. (See special 
preface.) 

18. Matacut. By Rev. JosepH Packarp, ἢ. D., Professor of Biblical Literature in 
the Theological Seminary at Alexandria, Virginia. 

The contributors to this volume were directed carefully to consult the entire ancient and 
modern literature on the Minor Prophets and to enrich it with the latest results of German 
and Anglo-American scholarship. 

The remaining parts of the Old Testament are all under way, and will be published aa 
fast as the nature of the work will permit. 


PHILIP SCHAFF. 


Umton Taw .oarcay Smamnaty, Nzw Vors, . 1cwary, 1874. 


GENERAL INTRODUCTION 
PROPHETIC WRITINGS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT, 


AND ESPECIALLY TO THE 


NEEN OR PROPHETS. 


aT 


CHARLES “ELLIOTT, Ὁ. Ὁ. 


PROFESSOR Uf KIBSLICAL LITERATURE AND EXEGESIS, IN THE PRESBYTERIAN THROLOGIJAB 
SEMINARY GF THK NORTHWEST. CHICAGO, ILLINOI8 


NEW  VORK: 
CHARLES SCRIBNER’?S SONS, 


Gmtered according to Act of Congress, in Mme year 1874, yy 
ScRIBNER, ARMSTRONG, AND COMPANY, 
sa the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washingtos. 


GENERAL INTRODUCTION 


TO THE 


MINOKR ΡΕΟΡΗΙΝΊ 


I. 
Meaning of the Words Prophet and Prophecy. 


Tue ordinary Hebrew word for prophet is Nabi (Heb. 8°23), derived from the verb N24, 
which is connected by Gesenius with y2), The former of these verbs is used in 
the Niphal and Hithpael species in the sense of speaking under a divine influence : 
the latter signifies in the Kal, to boil forth, to gush out, to flow, as a fountain. If this etymology 
is correct, the noun will designate a person, who bursts forth with spiritual utterances under 


the divine impulse, or simply one who pours forth words. Freytag defines the correspond- 
€-- 
ing word in Arabic (ῷ ) editus, elatus fuit, annuntiavit, renuntiavit alter alteri, se prophetam 


1. Nabi. 


dixit, propheticum munus vindicavit sibi. 

The form s*2) is like that of 5°07, and is taken by some in a passive sense, literally, one 
whe is divinely inspired. This is the opinion of Bunsen and Davidson. But Ewald, Hiaver- 
nick, Oehler, Hengstenberg, Bleek, Lee, Pusey, McCaul, and the great majority of Biblical 
critics, prefer the active sense of announcing, pouring forth the declarations of God, as more 
in accordance with the usage of the word. 

Two other Hebrew words are used to designate a prophet, namely, TS and anne Both 
these words signify one who sees, and are usually rendered in the LXX. by 2. Roch ana 
βλέπωι, or ὁρῶν, sometimes by πρυφήτης (1 Chron. xxvi. 28; 2 Chron. xvi. 7, Chozeh. 
10). The three words occur in 1 Chron. xxix. 29, where they seem to be contrasted with 
each other: ‘* Now the acts of David the King, first and last, behold they are written in 
the book of Samuel the seer (Roéh), and in the book of Nahum the prophet (V4b7), and in 
the book of Gad the seer (Chozeh). Roéh is used twelve times in the Bible (1 Sam. ix. 9, 
11, 18, 19; 2 Sam. xv. 27; 4 Chron. ix. 22; xxvi. 28; xxix. 29; 2. Chron. xvi. 7,10; Is. 
xxx. 10), and in seven of these it is applied to Samuel. It was superseded in general use 
by the word Nabi, by which Samuel himself’ was designated as well as by Roéh (1 Sam. iii. 
20; 2 Chron. χχχν. 18), and which seems to have revived after a period of desuetude (1 
Sam. ix. 9), and to have been applied to the company of prophets mentioned in 1 Sam. x. 
5, 10, 11, 12, and in xix. 20, 324. The verb 77, from which it is derived, is the common 
word in prose signifying “ to see ; ” 737 — whence comes the substantive | "7 —is more poet. 


ical. 5177, another derivative, is the word constantly used for the prophetical vision. It is 
found in Samuel, Chronicles, Psalms, Proverbs, and in most of the prophets. 
ΤΊ has been much debated whether there is any difference in the usage of these words, 


1 The books used most in preparing this Introduction are Hengstenberg’s Christology, Dean Stanley’s History of the 
Jewish Church, Auberlen On Daniel, Fairbairn On Prophecy, Davison On Prophecy, Stuart’s Hints on Prophecy, Bleek’a 
Introduction to the Old Testament, Keil’s Introduction to the Old Testament, Alexander’s Introduction to his Commen- 
tary on Isaiah, Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, and Kitto’s Biblical Cyclopedwa. See also the list of Commentaries 
on the Prophets at the close of the Introduction, No. IX.; and Knobel’s Prophetismus der Hebrier (1837, 2 vola.) ; Det 
"trach’s Biblisch-prophet. Theologie (1845); Gust. Baur’s Gesch. der alt. test. Weissagung (1861 #qq.). 


+ GENERAL INTRODUCTION 


and if any, what that difference is. Some consider Nabi to express the official prophet, that 
is, one who belonged to the prophetic order, while Roéh and Chozeh denote those who re 
ceived a prophetical revelation. The case of Gad is supposed to afford a clue to the diffi- 
culty. In 2 Sam. xxiv. 11, this prophet is described as the “ Nabi;” in 1 Chron. xxi. 9, as 
David’s “ Chozeh ;” and in 2 Chron. xxix. 25, as the King’s “ Chozeh,” while Nathan is sty-ed 
in the same place “the Nabi.” Hence it has been suggested that Chozeh was the special 
designation of the prophet attached to the royal household ; and that this individual might, 
at the same time, be a Nabi. Perhaps it is safe to say that the same persons were desig- 
nated by the three words Nabi, Roéh, and Chozeh, the last two titles being derived from the 
mode of receiving the divine communications ; the first, from the utterance of them to others. 
In any view of the case there can be little doubt that Nabi was employed to designate one 
_ who belonged to the prophetic order. When Gregory Nazianzen (Or., 28) calls Ezekiel ὃ 
Ov μεγάλων ἐπόπτης καὶ ἐξηγητὴς μυστηρίων, he gives a sufficiently exact translation of the 
two titles Chozeh or Roéh, and Nabi.! 

The word Nabi is uniformly translated in the LXX. by προφήτης, and in the A. V. by 
The word “prophet.” The proper sense of πρὸ is before, in front, as opposed to ὄπισθε, 
prophet does behind. Hence, according to the best lexicographers, the idea of priority in 
hot merely ,- : : o:: \topemme . 
signify one time is given as secondary to that of antecedence and priority in place. This 
who predicts view would give to πρό in πρόφημι and προφήτης, a local instead of a temporal 
TONS signification. Προφήτης would, in that case, denote an authoritative speaker in 
events; nor Oy at . 2 ; τ . . 
is the term the name of God; and it is applied in this sense, in the Classics, to the official 
prophecy re- expounders of the oracles, and to poets, as the prophets of the Muses, i. e., as 


stricted to Β . Β . - ΝΣ 2 3 

the, predic- speaking in their name, at their suggestion, or by their ey hs δσοι. 

tion of such The classical passage as to the meaning of the word N4Gbi is Exodus iv. 14-16: 
events. “And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Moses, and he said, Is not 


Aaron the Levite thy brother? I know that he can speak well. And also, behold, he 
cometh forth to meet thee : and when he seeth thee, he will be glad in his heart. And thou 
shalt speak unto him, and put words in his mouth; and I will be with thy mouth, and with 
his mouth, and will teach you what ye shall do. And he shall be thy spokesman unto the 
people ; and he shall be, even he shall be to thee instead of a mouth, and thou shalt be to 
him instead of God.” Take in connection with this Ex. vii. 1: “I have made thee a goa 
to Pharaoh; and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet” (abi); and the meaning of 
the word becomes plain. It means, one who speaks for another ; who utters the words that 
another has put into his mouth. His communications may have reference to the past, to the 
present, or to the future ; and may also extend to absolute and universal truth. These com- 
munications constitute prophecy. 

The restriction, in modern usage, of the term prophet to one who predicts future events, 
Restriction and prophecy to the prediction of these events, has arisen from the fact that a 


af on. large portion of the prophetic writings, and precisely that very portion which is 
prophet an 


prophecy,in most likely to impress the reader, is of this description. But these words do not 
modern admit of any such restriction in the Scriptures of both the Old and the New 
usage. 


Testament. In these they admit of the sense of declaration and interpretation. 

In the latter sense it was used by Lord Bacon, who speaks of an exercise called proph- 
esying. “The ministers within a precinct,” says Lord Bacon, “did meet upon a week day 
in some principal town, where there was some ancient grave minister that was president, and 
an auditory of gentlemen, or other persons of leisure. Then every minister successively, 
beginning with the youngest, did handle one and the same part of Scripture, spending sever- 
ally some quarter of an hour or better, and in the whole some two hours. And so the exer- 
cise being begun and concluded with prayer, and the president giving a text for the next 
meeting, the assembly was dissolved.” Jeremy Taylor uses the word, in the same sense, in 
his treatise On Liberty of Prophesying. A book was published at Oxford, in 1838, bearing 
the title, On the Prophetical Office of the Church, in which the adjective “ prophetical ” has 
evidently no reference to prediction. 


1 See Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, 8. v. “ Prophet; Kitto’s Bib. Cyclopedia, s. vy. ** Prophecy ;” Lee On the be 
wiwation of the Holy Scriptures, Appendix J ; and Aids to Faith, Essay iii., “ Prophecy.” 


GENERAL INTRODUCTION. ΟῚ 


Il. 


Prophetical Institution and Order. 


The Law provides for the Prophetical Institution (Deut. xviii.) ; hence it was no expe 
dient resorted to on special emergencies. Though the prediction (Deut. xviii.) The Pro- 
specially relates, as the gospel history shows, to the one distinguished Prophet, cee In: 
“of whom Moses in the Law did write,” yet the context (vers. 20, 21, 22) clearly provided for 
shows that a succession of inferior prophets was included. The gift of prophecy in the Law. 
was closely connected with the general design of the Old Economy, the foundation of which 
was the Law recorded in the Pentateuch. In the Law, as an epitome, the rest of the Old 
Testament is contained, as to its seminal principles. The later books are virtually a devel- 
opment and application of what is comprised in the Pentateuch. To make this develop- 
ment and application the prophetical order was instituted. 

The Scriptures do not represent an unbroken series of prophets, each inducted into office 
by his predecessor. At least, they are silent on this point, except in the cases ‘The gcrip- 
of Joshua and Elisha, the former of whom was inducted into office by Moses, and _ tures do not 
the latter by Elijah. The prophets are described as deriving their prophetical Wheseot 80 
character immediately from God, and do not seem to have attached much impor- series of 
tance to a series of incumbents, each receiving his commission from another, or Prophets, 


. : : : : euch induct 
from others. It was different with the priesthood, whose succession and induc- 44 into office 
tion into office were strictly prescribed. by his pred- 

ecessor. 


From the days of Joshua to Eli “ there was no open vision” (1 Sam. iii. 1). 
Under the judges the original constitution remained unchanged, though the nation was 
subjected to many vicissitudes of fortune. But in the time of Samuel marked changes passed 
over the state, and others were imminent. Kingly government was established ; the priest- 
hood was to be transferred, the kingdom to be dismembered, and the nation to be led into 
captivity. Changes so serious needed special interposition. Hence the revival and enlarge- 
ment of prophetic revelation. From Samuel to Malachi prophet followed prophet, in un- 
broken continuity, predicting the great changes that were coming upon the nation, and de- 
nouncing the sins that provoked the justice of heaven. 

Many portions of the prophctical writings are of such a character, that the writers could 
not have recorded them withou’ a special communication from heaven. They Nature of 
are, strictly speaking, Revelations. Other portions are not of this nature. They prophetic in- 
are such as must have been familiar to the sacred writers. Historical incidents *?"*"°™ 
were continually occurring around them of which they were cognizant. While it is evident 
that a supernatural knowledge was necessary in the former case, it is not so evident in the 
latter. They might have recorded historical events, as other historians have done, without 
any special divine aid. They might have done so, but they did not. In the former case 
they spoke by revelation, and in the latter by the inspiration? of the Holy Spirit. This 
they claim, and the writers of the New Testament accord it to them (2 Tim. iii. 16; 2 Pet. 
i. 21). They preface their announcements with “ Thus saith the Lord’.” 

In regard to the nature of prophetic inspiration, it is sufficient to state that it was plen- Ὁ 
ary, or fully adequate to the attainment of the end. It is vain and needless to attempt any 
description of its mode. So far as anything can be inferred from incidental or explicit 
statements of the Scripture, the most usual method of communication would appear to have 
been that of immediate vision. Micaiah saw (1 Kings xxii. 17); Isaiah saw (Is. vi. 1); 
Seer and Vision are used for prophet and prophecy. 

Some have supposed that the prophets, under the influence of inspiration, were in a con- 
dition expressed by the Greek word ἔκστασις, i. e., in a state of subjection to a higher 
power. Their own faculties, according to this view, were held in complete abeyance. Such 


1 See Alexander’s Introduction to the Prophecies of Isaiah. 

2 A distinction is made between revelation and inspiration. By revelation is meant a direct communication from God 
© man, either of such knowledge as man could not of himself attain to, or which was not, in point of fact, from what 
ever cause, Known to the person who received the revelation. Inspiration, on the other hand, is that actuating energy 
of the Holy Spirit, guided by which the human agents chosen by God have officially declared his will by word of mouth 
ἋΣ have committed to writing the several portions of the Bible. — Lee on Inspiration, pp. 40, 41. 


6 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 


a condition of mind was regarded as a natural and necessary sign of inspiration, on the pari 
of the pretended prophets and diviners of the heathen. They exhibited the outward signs 
of violent excitement, resembling insanity. Hence the etymological affinity of the Greek 
words μάντις, μανία, and μαίνομαι. The early fathers uniformly speak of this maniacal ex- 
eitement as characteristic of the inspiration claimed by the heathen diviners ; and describe 
the inspiration of the Hebrew prophets as distinguished by the opposite peculiarities of calm- 
ness, self-possession, and active intelligence. Their minds may have been, on certain occa- 
sions, in a highly elevated state ; but we have no reason to think that their mental condition 
was a morbid one. The action of the Holy Spirit did not supersede the exercise of their 
own intelligence: He spoke in them, not by them as mere instruments; and they, while 
uttering or recording his communications, preserved each his distinct individuality. 

It is the general opinion that Samuel instituted companies, or colleges of prophets; and 
Had the that “the sons of the prophets” mentioned in Scripture, were young men in a 
prophetsany course of preparation for the prophetic ministry. We find one of these com- 
eee, panies, or colleges, during Samuel’s life-time, at Ramah (1 Sam. xix. 19, 20), 

' others afterwards at Bethel (2 Kings ii. 3); Jericho (2 Kings ii. 5); Gilgal (2 
Kings iv. 38) ; and elsewhere (2 Kings vi. 1). These colleges were probably, in their con- 
stitution and object, similar to our theological seminaries, which are sometimes called 
“ Schools of the Prophets.” Into them were gathered promising students, and there they 
were trained for the office which they were destined to fill. So successful were these institu- 
tions, that from the time of Samuel to the completion of the Canon of the Old Testament 
there seems never to have been wanting a due supply of men to keep up the line of officia: 
prophets. 

To this it may be objected that the ministry of the prophets depended on the gift of in- 


spiration, for which no human training could compensate, or prepare them. But although, 


they could not act as prophets without inspiration, they might be prepared for those parts of 
their work which depended upon literary culture. 

The prophets, though inspired, were not omniscient. They were the spokesmen of God, 
Had the the mouth of God to communicate his messages to men. They had visions; they 
prophets @ = saw: pictires were presented to their spiritual intuition; but their understand- 
full knowl- . . os 
edge of what igs were not so miraculously enlarged as to grasp the whole of the divine coun- 
they pre- sels, which they were commissioned to enunciate. We have the testimony of the 
ES prophets themselves (Dan. xii. 8; Zech. iv. 5; 1 Pet. i. 10,11) that they did 
not comprehend them. These passages, however, have been pushed so far by some as to 
make it appear that the prophets were only speaking machines. This extreme must be 
avoided as well as the other, which would make them omniscient. The writer of the article 
on Prophecy, in Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, commenting on 1 Pet. i. 10, 11, says, that 
the prophets “after having uttered predictions on those subjects occupied themselves in 
searching into the full meaning of the words that they had uttered.” This statement is per- 
haps not sufficiently guarded. The Apostle writes: ἐρευνῶντες εἰς τίνα 4 ποῖον καιρόν, 
in which τίνα is interrogative and agrees with καιρόν, and not with πράγματα understood. 
If the Apostle had designed to say, that the prophets searched into what things they had ut- 
tered, he would have written: εἰς τίνα, καὶ ποῖον καιρόν. The expression should, therefore, 
be rendered, searching what time, or what manner of time. This conveys a very different 
idea, and makes the object of the prophets’ search, not the meaning of the words which they 
had uttered, but some additional knowledge concerning the subjects of which they had spoken. 
Zech. iv. 5 may mean no more than that the prophet did not understand the symbols men- 
tioned in the preceding verses. 

In Dan. xii. 8, the prophet declares that he “heard, but understood not.” This evidently 
relates to what was suggested to his mind by the declarations of ver. 7, where it is said that 
the end of the wonders shall be after “a time, times, and a half.” Daniel does not inquire 


like the angel, in ver 6, “how long” (19°) “ shall it be to the end of these wonders δ" 
but “ what shall be the end” (ΤΙΝ) “of these things.” If MTN (end, Jatter state, final 
fot) means the same as Yj) (end) in ver. 6, the interrogative 71> (what) used by Daniel it 
inappropriate. His question, therefore, must have respect to the state of things at the close 
of the “time, times, and a half,” ver. 7.2 


\ Hints on the Interpretation of Prophecy By M. Stuart. Second Edition. Andover, 1842 Pages 54-57 


GENERAL INTRODUCTION. i] 


—_s 


A full discussion of this point is not necessary to the present purpose. The prophets, in 
many cases, saw “ through a glass darkly ;” but they did not, like mere automata, utter words 
which they did not understand. They were inspired and guided by the Holy Spirit, whose 
will they revealed. “ Unto them it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they 
did minister the things which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the 
gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven” (1 Pet. i. 12). 

The prophets had a practical office to discharge. It was part of their commission to 
show the people of God “ their transgression, and the house of Jacob their sins.”  jeiation of 
— (Is. lviii.1; Ezek. xxii. 2; xliii. 10; Micah iii. 8.) They were, therefore, pas- the prophets 
tors and ministerial monitors of the people of God. It was their duty to admon- i Pees 
ish and reprove, to denounce prevailing sins, to threaten the people with the ~~ 
terrors of divine judgment and call them to repentance. They also brought the message of 
consolation and pardon (Is. xl. 1,2). They were watchmen set upon the walls of Zion to 
blow the trumpet and give timely warning of approaching danger (Ezek. iii. 17; xxxiii. 7, 
8,9; Jer. vi. 17; Is. lxii. 6). 

The relation of the prophets to the people bore a greater resemblance to that of the Chris- 
tian ministry than to that of the priests. The latter approached God in behalf of men, by 
means of sacrifice ; the former approached men in behalf of God. They were his ambassa- 
dors, beseeching men to turn from their evil ways and live. The functions of the prophetical 
office were, therefore, not identical with those of the priesthood. The prophets were not 
priests, with the exception of Jeremiah and Ezekiel (Jer. i. 1; Ezek. i. 3). 

They do not seem to have sustained any definite or fixed relation to the government. 
They were not officers of state, though they exerted an influence upon rulers and state 
affairs. This they did not by official formal action, but as special messengers from God, 
whose divine legation even the apostate kings of Israel acknowledged. Sometimes the kings 
refused to hear the prophet’s message ; but such obstinacy was the sealing of their doom. 

It is not easy to determine the mode of life which the prophets led. It was probably 
subject to no uniform and rigid law. Some have inferred from Elijah’s hairy yoo of life 
dress and John the Baptist’s imitation of it, that they were distinguished by a of the proph- 
peculiar dress and an ascetic mode of life. But the conclusion is too hasty. Their °* 
dress sometimes may have been a “ sermo propheticus realis,” to teach the people what they 
ought to do, and not a piece of asceticism. They do not seem to have been anxious of at- 
tracting notice by ostentatious display; nor did they seek wealth, but some of them, and 
probably the most of them, lived in poverty and want (1 Kings xiv. 3; 2 Kings iv. 1, 38, 
42; vi. 5). It is probable that the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews (xi. 37, 38) alludes 
to the sufferings and privations of the prophets especially, in their temporal humiliation, a 
vivid representation of which we have in the lives of Elijah and Elisha, in the books of the 
Kings; and in the case of Jeremiah, who concludes the description of his sufferings (chap 
xx.) by cursing the day of his birth. Repudiated by the world in which they were aliens, 
they typified the life of Him, whose appearance they announced, and whose spirit dwelt in 
them. Their persecution and suffering did not arise from opposition to them as a distinct 
class, leading an unsociable, ascetic mode of life, but from opposition to their faithful ministry. 
From the very nature of that ministry, it was exempted from the rules of outward uniform- 
ity. Hichhorn has justly mentioned as a characteristic difference between the heathen and 
the Jewish prophets, that whereas the former tried to enhance their authority by darkness 
and seclusion, and mysterious accompaniments, the latter moved among the people without 
any such factitious advantages. 

Other topics, concerning the prophetical office, the functions and mode of life of the 
prophets, will readily occur to the careful reader of the Holy Scriptures. The mere men- 
tion of some of these must suffice. The prophets were the national poets of Israel. Music, 
poetry, and hymns were a part of the studies of the class from which, generally speaking, 
they were derived. They were annalists and historians. A great portion of their writings 
is direct or indirect history. According to the testimony of Josephus the whole of the Old 
Testament was written by them. They were preachers of patriotism. Their patriotism, as 
subjects of the theocracy, was founded on motives of religion. The enemy of the nation 
was the enemy of God. Hence their denunciation of an enemy was a denunciation of a 
representative of evil; their exhortations in behalf of Jerusalem were exhortations in behalf 
of God’s kingdom on earth. 


3 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 


ΠΙ. 


Contents and Sphere of the Prophetical Writings. 


As the function of the prophet was not limited to the disclosure of the future, but in. 
Thecontents Cluded in it the expounding and application of the Law, the declaration of God’s 
are doctrinal will in regard to present duty and of absolute and universal truth, so the pro- 
anid ES phetic volume is not confined to prediction. In accordance with this twofold 

character of the prophetic office, it contains two elements, which may be called 
the moral or doctrinal, and the predictive. 

These two parts are not disjoined in the prophetical writings, neither were they disjoined 
These two im the design and communication of prophecy; but it will conduce to a better 
pee oot understanding of the subject to view them separately. The sequel, therefore, 
disjoined. will exhibit a brief summary of the principal doctrines of the former, and the 
scheme of the latter. 

By the sphere of prophecy are meant the parties for whom it was given, and the objects 
Bphere of which it more immediately contemplated. Prophecy, in its stricter sense of con- 
Prophecy. taining pre-intimations of good things to come, is for the benefit of the church. 
The church, consequently, is its proper sphere. Only in an incidental and remote manne: 
could it have been intended to bear upon those without; for it was the revelation of the 
Lird’s secret in regard to the future movements of his providence, which belongs peculiarly 
to them that fear him (Ps. xxv. 14). It was not a revelation, however, for such as might 
needlessly seek to pry into the future, but for the higher purpose, especially in tinies of dark- 
ness and perplexity, of furnishing the light that might be required for present faith and duty 
It is not God’s common method to lay open his hidden counsel respecting things destined to 
come to pass, even to the children of his covenant; for such knowledge, if imparted with 
any measure of fullness and precision, would be a dangerous possession, and would tend to 
destroy the simplicity of their trust in God, and beget an unhealthy craving after human cal- 
culations and worldly expedients. It is only, therefore, within certain limits, or in cases that 
may be deemed somewhat exceptional, that God can grant, even to his chosen, a prophetical 
insight into future events. In so far as it may be needful to awaken or sustain hope in times 
of darkness and discouragement, to inspire confidence in the midst of general backsliding and 
rebuke, at the approach of imminent danger to the life of faith, to give due intimation of the 
brooding evil, — at such times and for such purposes, God’s merciful regard to the safety and 
well-being of his people may fitly lead Him to provide them with an occasional and partial 
disclosure of the future; but the same regard would equally constrain Him to withhold it 
when not necessary for the moral ends of his government. 

The cases of Balaam and Daniel, both of whom primarily disclosed to the enemies of 
Apparent ex- | G0d’s kingdom the things destined to come to pass, may seem to conflict with 
ceptions tothis the view that the church is the sphere of prophecy. Both these men, however, 
vir occupied a kind of exceptional position. They stood apart, not only from the 
prophetical order of men in Israel, but also from the common affairs of the church. Hence 
the writings of Daniel, notwithstanding their high prophetical character, have had a place 
assigned them in the Jewish Canon distinct from the writings of strictly prophetical men. But 
in regard to the point immediately before us, the grounds of exception are more apparent 
than real. For in the case of both Balaam and Daniel it was mainly for the light and 
encouragement of the church that the word of prophecy came by them; only the circum- 
stances of the times were such as to render the camp of the enemy the most appropriate 
watch-tower, where it should be received and primarily made known. At both periods Israel 
had come into direct collision with the kingdoms of the world; in the one case as a new, in 
the other as a smill and shattered power, standing over against others of mighty prowess, 
snd, as might seem, of all-prevailing energy.! 

There are prophecies against Babylon, Tyre, Egypt, and other kingdoms, which, as being 
Predictions delivered to the people of God to comfort them by revealing to them the fate of 
wgalnst their enemies, cannot be considered as exceptions to the view taken. The proph- 


1 Fairbairn On Prophecy, chapter ill. 


GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 9 


ecy of Jonah, however, against Nineveh, is of a different character and seems to ee : 
be exceptional. The prophet was sent to a heathen power to denounce the judg- uoebrsd a 
ments of God against it. He did not, in his own land and among his own and other 
people, preach against Nineveh, but he entered the Great City itself and de- ‘i™s¢o™* 
nounced the judgment of God against it. Jonah was a typical character and his mission 
to Nineveh may have been typical of the mission of Israel to be “a light of the Gentiles,’ 
an 1 intended to awaken the nation to a consciousness of its mission; for not only the Mes- 
siah but the Israel of God was sent to be a mediator or connecting link between Jehovak 
and the nations.|. The prophecy of Jonah, therefore, may not be really exceptional, as it 
may have been intended as a type to the ancient church of the mission, which it had 
neglected and forgotten. It had acted like Jonah, but with greater success, when he 
attempted to flee to Tarshish, in a merchant vessel, to evade the commission, which God had 
given him to discharge. 


IV. 


Doctrinal Prophecy. 


It does not fall in with the aim of this introductory treatise to exhibit, in detail, all the 
doctrines taught in the prophetic writings. It is sufficient to notice briefly the principal 
ones, and to state their relation to the Law and the Gospel. 

The prophetical Scriptures speak of God as an eternal, self-existent, and spiritual Being. 
They speak of Him as a person, —a self-conscious, intelligent, moral and volun- Doctrine of 
tary agent, doing all things according to the purpose of his own will. They 
ascribe to Him all the attributes of such a Being in infinite perfection. 

No doctrine is more plainly taught than the unity of God. “Iam the first, and I am the 
last; and besides me there is no God” (ls. xliv. 6). At the same time the Unity and 
doctrine of a trinity of persons — a doctrine more fully developed in the New Tity- 
Testament — is clearly intimated. In Is. vii. 14 and ix. 6, 7, we read of the birth of a 
child, whose mother was a Virgin. ‘That this child was the eternal son of God, equal with 
the Father, is proved—(1) from his name Immanuel, which means God with us, i. e., God in 
our nature; (2) from his titles, Wonderful, Counsellor, the Mighty God, Father of Eternity, 
and Prince of Peace; (3) from the character of his Kingdom: it is everlasting and univer- 
sal. The prophet Micah predicted (chap. v. 1, 5) that one was to be born in Bethlehem, 
who was to be the Ruler of Israel, i. 6., of all the people of God. Although he was to be 
born in time and made of a woman, his goings forth were from of old, from everlasting. He 
was to manifest, in his government, the possession of divine attributes and glory. His 
dominion was to be universal and its effects peace. 

We also read of the Spirit of Jehovah, to whom are ascribed intelligence and will. The 
possession of these implies personality. In Ezekiel (i. 4-28) it is the Spirit that animates 
the fourfold cherubim and their mystic wheels. It is the Spirit, who entered into the prophet 
and set him on his feet, and lifted him up between the earth and heaven, and brought him 
in a vision to Chaldza, and said to him, “ Son of man, I send thee to the children of Israel. 

. . Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord” (Ezek. ii. 2-9). It was the Spirit that 
ἘΠ: life into the dry bones (Hzek. xxxvii. 9-14). Micah asks: “Is the Spirit of the 
Lord straightened”? (ii. 7). “I am full of power by the Spirit of the Lord” (Micah 
di. 8). Joel foretells the Pentecostal effusion of the Spirit (chap. ii. 28, 29). Many 
other passages might be adduced from the prophets, containing distinct notices of the pres- 
ence and power of the Spirit. These passages, as parts of a progressive revelation per- 
fected in the New Testament, cannot be made, by any process of criticism, to mean a mere 
divine influence. 

The God of the prophets is the Creator of all things (Is. xlii. 5); and the upholder of 
all things (Jer. x. 23; xviii. 6; Dan. v. 23). They do not deify the laws of Creation — 
nature: these are only his ordinances and servants. They are the modes of —-" 
his operation. He sits behind the elements that He has formed, giving birth ona 
and movement to all things. “When he uttereth his voice, there is a multitude of 

1 Alexander on Isaiah xlii. 6 


i0 GENERAL INTRODUCTION, 

water in the heavens, and he causeth vapors to ascend from the ends of the earth; he 
maketk lightnings with rain, and bringeth forth the wind out of his treasures’? (Jer. x, 
13) “ Whatsoever the Lord pleased, that did He in heaven, and in earth, in the seas, and 
all deep places” (Ps. cxxxv. 6). He causeth the grass to grow for the vattle, and herb 
for the service of man. ‘ The young lions roar after their prey, and seek their meat from 
God. These all wait upon thee; that thou mayest zive them their meat in due season. 
That thou givest them, they gather: thou openest thy hand, they are filled with good ” (Ps. 
civ. 14, 21, 27, 28). “O Lord, thou preservest man and beast” (Ps. xxxvi. 6). “ Thy 
right hand upholdeth me.” (Ps. Lxiii. 8). These passages teach a universal, particular, and 
present Providence, controlling all things and directing their issues. It is not restricted te 
man, but extends to the beasts of the field. It is not confined to the Jewish theocracy, 
where it is displayed by more palpable manifestations; but it embraces Egypt and Babylon, 
Assyria and Persia, Moab and Ammon, the isles of the Gentiles, in a word, all the nations 
of the earth. 

This Providence is asserted, when the event in question is brought about with no sensible 
ilisturbance of the ordinary influence of human motives; with no derangement of what is 
commonly called the natural course of things. Cyrus, for instance, whom the Greek histo- 
rian describes, no doubt truly, as pursuing his career of conquest, in his own proper charac- 
ter, was only an instrument appointed for purposes of the divine government, which purposes 
the prophet Isaiah unfolds to us. Moses was a deliverer from Egypt, and Cyrus from Baby- 
lon: the former acted under an express legation, and was clothed with the power of work- 
ing miracles ; the latter had no such extraordinary power given to him. Yet divine Provi- 
dence wrought by both ; and so that Providence, in its ordinary course, is certain, active, and 
universal. Such is the account of the present constitution of things, which the tenor of 
prophecy affirms. In conformity with this account, the prophets deliver their predictions of 
future events, not as if they were announcing the bare truth of the future facts, but a pur 
pose and design. They indulge a strain of prediction, which carries in itself the seed of 
its accomplishment, and sometimes declare themselves to have been constituted the agents of 
the divine counsels. “I the Lord have spoken it, and I will do it” (Ezek. xxxvi. 3¢ , iz 
subjoined to the event declared. ‘Shall there be evil in a city, and the Lord hath not done 
it”? (Amos iii. 6). “See,” saith the Lord to Jeremiah, “I have this day set thee over 
the nations, and over the kingdoms, to root out, and to pull down, and to destroy, and to 
throw down, and to build, and to plant” (Jer. i. 10). This language is figurative, for the 
prophet himself was not to do these things; but it is plain who was to do them. Again, 
“ Hast thou not heard long ago, how I have done it, and of ancient times that I have formed 
it? Now have I brought it to pass, that thou shouldest be to lay waste defenced cities into 
ruinous heaps” (Is. xxxvii. 26). The Assyrian desolator, in his grasping ambition, was the 
unconscious servant of an unseen Power, the instrument of that unerring wisdom that rules 
the world. 

Prophecy is more or less a commentary upon the doctrine of divine providence. It 
represents the future event, which it brings to view, as a part of that system of things in 
which the Creator is present by the direction of his power, and the counsels of his wisdom, 
appointing the issues of futurity as well as foresecing them; acting with “his mighty hand 
and outstretched arm” seen or unseen; ruling in the kingdoms of men, ordering all things 
in heaven and earth. 

The anthropology of the prophets is as full and complete as their theology. Man was 
created by God (Mal. ii. 10) ; he has a common origin (ibidem); he has the 
power of reason (Ezek. xii. 2; Is. i. 18); a capacity for holiness (Is. i. 18) 
for knowledge and progress (Is. ii. 3, 4, 5); he is ruined and cannot save himself (Hos 
xiii. 9; Jer. ii. 22; xiii. 23); he is a subject of God’s moral government and owes entire 
obedience to his law (Dan. iv. 34, 35; Ezek. xviii. 4, 5,9; xxxiii. 11-16; Is. i. 19, 20) 
worship and homage must be rendered to God (Mal. i. 11; iii. 10; Is. lx. 6, 7). The rela- 
tions of men to one another are clearly stated, and the duties arising out of these relations 
enforced ; in a word all the duties of the decalogue are strictly enjoined. 

Under the old dispensation, as well as under the new, the favor of God was secured by 
faith. The Apostle Paul, in his Epistle to the Romans (i. 17), quotes, in confir- 
mation of the doctrine of justificatior by faith, Habakkuk ii. 4. Throughout the 
prophetic writings we find exhortations to trust ir Jehovah and the result of confidence 1 


Man 


Faith. 


GENERAL INTRODUCTION. ΠῚ 


Him. “ Thou wilt keep him in perfect peace, whose mind is stayed on thee: because he 
trusteth in thee. Trust ye in the Lord for ever: for in the Lord Jehovah is everlasting 
strength ” (Is. xxvi. 8, 4)., This confidence, in its ground and object, is not necessarily 
identical with evangelical faith, yet it is the same in principle. The writer of the Epistle tc 
the Hebrews enumerates its effects; but in some of his instances, we are hardly warranted 
in assuming the existence of that faith, which justifies the sinner. Yet the doctrine of a 
justifying faith is clearly taught, and ia some passages necessarily implied, in the law, and 
in the prophets, as the Apostle Paul asscrts and proves, in his Epistle to the Romans (Rom. 
iii. 21; chap. iv. 3; compare Gen. xv. 6; Is. lili. 11; Jer. xxxiii. 15, 16). 

The prophets inculeate with remarkable clearness and decision the doctrine of repent- 
ance. “ Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts ; 
and let him return unto the Lord, and He will have mercy upon him; and to 
our God, for He will abundantly pardon ” (Is. lv. 7). ‘Then shall ye remember your evil 
ways, and your doings that were not good, and shall loathe yourselves in your own sight for 
your iniquities, and for your abominations” (Ezek. xxxvi. 31; xx. 43). They preach the 
necessity of it, in order to escape ruin (Ezek. xiv. 6; xviii. 30). They invest it with a 
high moral dignity (Is. lvii. 15). They encourage it by promises (Hos. vi. 1, 2, 3; Joel 
ii. 12, 13). 

The doctrinal teaching of the prophets. is intermediate between the Law and the Gospel. 
It is a step in advance of the Law and preparatory to the Christian dispensa- A a 
tion. It goes beyond the Law, in respect to the greater distinctness and fullness  ¢rinat teach 
of some of its doctrines and precepts; it is a more perfect exposition of the ing of the 
principles of personal holiness and virtue ; its sanctions have less of an exclusive eee 
reference to temporal promises and incline more to evangelical; the mere ritual between the 
of the Law begins to be discountenanced by it; and the superior value of a Lawand the 
spiritual service is enforced. The Law had said: “ Thou shalt love the Lord thy Soe 
God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might” (Deut. vi. δ). 
Nothing could go beyond this commandment, in its extent ; but where nothing can be added 
to extend a law, much may be added to expound it, animate its spirit, and direct its prac- 
tice. It is precisely this that the prophets do. They everywhere recognize the authority of 
the Law of Moses, exalt its practical force, and improve its obligations. Thus like Him, to 
whom they all bear witness, they do not destroy the law, but fulfill it. In them we have the 
unfolding of those germinal principles, which attain to their full development in the teaching 
of Christ, the Head and Crown of the prophetic order. 


Repentance. 


Vi. 
Predictive Prophecy. — Its Structure. 


A twofold view may be taken of predictive prophecy, —its structure and verification 
The former constitutes the present theme of consideration. Twofold 

A question may arise in regard to the personal liberty of men, who are the Ve 
subjects of prophecy. If God has determined an event by prophecy and the predictive 
agents to accomplish it, how can these agents be considered as acting freely ? prophecy 
This question has difficulties, the solution of which does not fall in with the scope ee 
of this dissertation. All who receive, in sincerity, the statements of Scripture, 
must admit that the foreknowledge, or certain determination of the future actions of men, is 
compatible with their moral freedom. “Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel 
and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain ” 
(Acts ii. 23). No greater difficulty lies against prophecy in regard to man’s free agency 
than against preordination generally. Pharoah acted freely, though God raised him up te 
show in him his power, and to declare his name throughout all the earth (Ex. ix. 16). 
So also did Cyrus and Nebuchadnezzar, though they were the chosen agents of God in 
xccomplishing his purposes. It never once occurred to these men that they were mere 
plind instruments ; for they were conscious of their freedom. 


12 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 


Another question may arise as to the absolute certainty of the fulfillment of a predicted 
Does the pre- future event. The question here is not whether any fixed purpose and determi: 
diction of a nation of God is liable to be changed by the contingent actions of men; for in 
future event ἢ Ξ - 
render it ab- tat respect, the truth, founded in God’s nature, must stand fast forever. “ Goa 
solute ssi is not a man, that He should lie ; neither the son of man, that He should re ent 
— hath He said, and shall He not do it? or hath He spoken, and shall He not make 
it good?” (Num. xxiii. 19.) The question is, whether prophecy ought to be regarded, in 
every instance, as announcing what is fixed and conclusively determined by God; or 
whether it should not to some extent, and if to some, then to what extent, be viewed a» the 
proclamation of God’s mind respecting his future dealings, on the supposition of the parties 
interested standing in a certain relationship to his character and government. In the .atter 
case the prediction might assuredly be expected to take effect, in so far as the relatioi.s con- 
templated in it continued; but in the event of a change in these relations, then a correspond- 
ing change in regard to the prediction may reasonably be expected. This is the real ques- 
tion at issue among those who concur in holding prophecy to be a supernatural disclesure of 
God’s mind and will. 

“ As everything future,” says Olshausen on Matthew chap. xxiv., “even that which pro- 
Olshausen’s ceeds from the freedom of the creature, when viewed in relation to the divine 
τον: knowledge, can only be regarded as necessary ; so everything future, as far as it 
concerns man, can only be regarded as conditional upon the use of his freedom. As 
obstinate perseverance in sin hastens destruction, so genuine repentance may avert it: this 
is illustrated in the Old Testament, in the prophet Jonah, by the history of Nineveh, and 
intimated in the New Testament by Paul, when (like Abraham praying for Sodom) he 
describes the elements of good existing in the world as exercising a restraint upon the judg- 
ments of God (2 Thess. ii. 7) ; and 2 Pet. iii. 9, the delay of the Lord is viewed as an act 
of divine long-suffering, designed to afford men space for repentance. Accordingly when 
the Redeemer promises the near approach of his coming, this announcement is to be taken 
with the restriction (to be understood in connection with all predictions of judgments), ‘ All 
this will come to pass, unless men avert the wrath of God by sincere repentance.’ None of 
the predictions of divine judgments are bare, historical proclamations of that which will take 
place; they are alarms calling men to repentance, —of which it may be said that they 
announce something for the very purpose that what they announce may not come to pass.” 

Hengstenberg (art. “ Prophecy,” Kitto’s Cyclopedia) says: ‘“ Some interpreters, mis- 
Hengsten- | understanding passages like Jer. xviii. 8; xxvi. 13, have asserted with Dr. Koster 
berg’s view. (py. 296 ff.), that all prophecies were conditional, and have even maintained that 
their revocability distinguished the true predictions (Weissagung) from soothsaying ( Wahr- 
sagung). But beyond all doubt, when the prophet denounces the divine judgments, he pro- 
ceeds on the assumption that the people will not repent, an assumption, which he knows 
from God to be true. Were the people to repent, the prediction would fail; but because 
they will not, it is uttered absolutely. It does not follow, however, that the prophet’s warn- 
ings and exhortations are useless. These serve ‘for a witness against them’; and besides, 
amid the ruins of the mass, individuals might be saved. Viewing prophecies as conditional 
predictions nullifies them. The Mosaic criterion (Deut. xviii. 22), that he was a false 
prophet who predicted ‘things which followed not nor came to pass,’ would then be of no 
value, since recourse might always be had to the excuse, that the case had been altered by 
the fulfilling of the condition. The fear of introducing fatalism, if the prophecies are not 
taken in a conditional sense, is unfounded ; for God’s omniscience, his foreknowledge, does 
not establish fatalism, and from divine omniscience simply is the prescience of the prophets 
to be derived.” 

“These two forms of representation,” Dr. Fairbairn remarks (Fairbairn On Prophecy. 

,. New York: Carlton & Porter, 1866), “may both be characterized as somewhat 
aS extreme, and neither of them can be applied to the actual interpretation of the 
prophetic Scriptures, without coming at many points into conflict with the un 

doubted facts of the case.” 

Dr. F., considering an exact classification impossible, on account of the concrete character 
of the prospective delineations of prophecy, and the readiness with which these in thei 
diverse aspects run into each other, traces out a few broad and easily recognized distinctions 
which, for all practical purposes, may be held to be sufficient. 


GENERAL INIFRODUCTION. 13 


1. “ There is, first, a class of prophecies, the direct and proper object of which is to dis: 
zlose God’s purposes of grace to men, and indicate in its grander outlines their appointed 
sourse of development. As the ultimate ground of these purposes is plainly in God him- 
self, and the bringing of them into accomplishment is emphatically his work, it is evident 
that, in respect to this line of things, there can be no room for the operation of any condi- 
tional element except in regard to the subordinate relations of place and time. Whether to be 
sooner or later in effecting he results aimed at, whether to be effected in this particular mode, ot 
in some other that might be conceived, in such things, as the plan of God necessarily comes 
into contact with earthly relations and human agencies, it must presuppose a certain adapta 
tion in the state of the world and the conduct of πα men. Hence, in these respects, 
announcements might be made at one time, which, as seen from a human point of view, ap- 
peared to have undergone a relative change at another; but the things themselves and all 
that essentially concerns their history and progressive operation in the world, being entirely 
and absolutely of God, must proceed in strict accordance with the intimations he gives of 
his mind respecting them. 

“ As examples of this great class of prophecies,” Dr. Fairbairn points “to the original 
announcement of salvation by the triumph of the woman’s seed over that of the tempter; to 
the promise given to Abraham that through his seed all the families of the earth should be 
blessed ; to the successive limitations made as to the fulfillment of this promise in its main 
provisions, by its special connection with the tribe of Judah, the house of David, and a 
virgin-born son of that house ; to the representations made of this glorious Being himself, 
of the constitution of his person, the place of his birth, the nature and circumstances of his 
career on earth, the character of his government, the final results and glories of his king- 
dom, with the opposite destinies of those who might set themselves in array against it. In 
regard to all that in this respect was purposed in the divine mind, and announced from time 
to time in the prophetic Word, there could be no room for any such conditional element as 
might in the least affect the question whether they should actually come to pass or not; for 
they were matters entering into the very core of the divine administration, and eieeolailg 
linked to the great principles on which from the first all was destined to proceed. As con- 
cerns them, we have simply to do with the omniscience of God in foreseeing, his veracity in 
declaring, and his overruling providence in directing what should come to pass. 

2. “ Another class of prophecies, in their ostensible character and design widely different 
from the preceding, yet much akin as regards the point now under consideration, consists of 
those which, from time to time, were uttered concerning the powers and kingdoms that stood 
in a rival or antagonistic position to the Kingdom of God. It is not such prophecies gener- 
ally, as respected those powers and kingdoms, that are now referred to, but those which were 
given forth concerning them, addressed not so properly to them as to the people of God, and 
for the purpose of allaying what naturally awoke fear and anxiety in the minds of believers 
Predictions like that of Jonah to the Ninevites belong to an entirely different class; for ir 
this there was a direct dealing with the people of a heathen city in respect to their sin and 
liability to punishment; a preaching more than a prediction; and both preaching and pre- 
diction entering into the sphere of human responsibility, and intended to operate as means 
of moral suasion. Nineveh was not at that time viewed as occupying a hostile position to 
the interests of God’s kingdom in Israel, but as itself a hopeful field for spiritual agency ; 
more hopeful indeed than Israel itself, and fitted to tell with a wholesome influence even on 
the people of the Covenant. The mass of prophecies, however, uttered respecting worldly 
powers and states, had an entirely different object. Contemplating these as rival, and for 
the most part directly antagonistic forces, they were mainly intended to assure the hearts of 
God’s people that whatever earthly resources and glory might for the time belong to those 
kinedoms, all was destined to pass away; that their dominion, however arrogant and pow- 
erful, should come to an end; while that kingdom which was more peculiarly the Lord’s, 
and was identified with his covenant of grace and blessing, should survive all changes and 
attain to an everlasting as well as universal supremacy. Prophecies of this description, 
therefore, stood in a very close relation to those already considered ; they but exhibited the 
reverse side of God’s covenant love and faithfulness. If the purposes of grace and holiness 
tonnected with his covenant were to stand, all counter authority and rival dominion must 
pe put down; the safety and well-being of the one of necessity involved the destruction of 
the other. And to certify believers that such would be the result, was the more immediate 


14 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 


design of the prophecies in question ; of the later prophecy, for example, uttered respecting 
Nineveh by Nahum, when the city had become the centre of a God-opposing monarchy ; and 
of the many similar predictions scattered through the prophetic writings concerning Egypt 
Babylon, Assyria, Edom, and the surrounding heathen states. 

“Tt holds of this class of prophecies as a whole, that in their grand aim they disclose the 
settled purposes of God: purposes that grow out of the essential principles of his character 
and government ; and that the results they announce are consequently to be regarded as of 
an absolute character. As concerned the kingdoms themselves whose destinies they un- 
folded, they could scarcely be said to become, through the prophecies in question, except in 
a very limited degree, the subjects of moral treatment; for the prophecies were communi- 
cated to the covenant people rather than to them, and comparatively few of the heathen 
concerned might ever have come to any distinct knowledge ot what had been spoken. 

3. “ Leaving now the two classes of prophecies which from their very nature can possess 
little or nothing of a conditional element, we proceed to notice those which purposely and 
directly bore upon men’s responsibilities ; those which by means of promise or threatening 
placed the subjects of divine revelation under the peculiar training of heaven. Here we 
find from the sacred records that the conditional element has often, as a matter of fact, been 
strikingly exhibited ; and it must always, we conceive, be virtually if not formally and ex- 
pressly found intermingling itself with prophetic intimations of the kind in question. This 
conditionality rests upon two great and fundamental principles. The first of these is, that 
in God’s prophetical revelation of his dealing with men as in the revelations of his mind 
generally, all is based on.an ethical foundation and directed to an ethical aim; so that the 
prediction should never be viewed apart from the moral considerations on account of or in 
connection with which it was uttered. And the other principle is, that in giving intimations 
to men or communities of approaching good or evil, God speaks as in other parts of Scrip- 
ture in an anthropomorphic manner ; He addresses the subjects of his threatening or promise 
more from a human than from a divine point of view ; in other words, He adopts that mode of 
representation which is most natural to men, and which is best adapted for impressing and 
influencing their minds. 

“ Let us take, as an illustration of the proper working of these principles, the striking case 

of Nineveh already referred to. After having sent his prophet to announce the destruction 
of Nineveh in a specified time, the Lord suffered the prophecy to fall into abeyance, re- 
frained from executing the threatened doom, or in the language of Scripture, He repented of 
the evil He said He would do to the city, because of the moral change that had meanwhile 
taken place among its inhabitants, as manifested in their turning from their evil ways” God 
acts on the principles of righteousness, and, in accordance with these, He must change his 
dealings toward men, when their relation to Him has become changed. Shall not the Judge 
of all the earth do right? (Gen. xviii. 25). “Hear now, O Israel, is not my way equal ? 
Are not your ways unequal? When a righteous man turneth away from his righteousness 
and «ommitteth iniquities, and dieth in them; for the iniquity that he hath done shall he 
die. Again, when the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness that he hath commit- 
ted, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive” (Ezek. xviii. 
25-27). 

After these preliminary observations, we now proceed to trace the stream of prophecy 
from its beginning down to the close of the Old Testament Canon, when, as if expectant of 
‘the advent of its great subject, it comes to a sudden pause. A like cessation occurs between 
Joshua and Samuel, the reasons of which will be noticed in the proper place. With the 
exception of these two periods of cessation, and perhaps of some others, either not men- 
tioned or not so distinctly marked, prophecy flows on with widening channel, until it reaches 
its appointed limits. In the time of Abraham it takes a double, though not a divergent 
course. This was necessary, as in him we have the first point of union, in prophecy, of the 
Jewish and Christian dispensations ; and from this era it takes up and preserves a twofold 
character related to them both. 

The date and origin of the predictions of prophecy are coeval with the earliest history 
Date of of man. ‘This history is that of his creation, sin, and fall. No s»over nad he 
prophecy. fallen shan prophecy intimated a way of recovery. The first prediction was 
given in mercy: it contained a promise adapted to man’s forfeited condition. This was the 
oromise of a Redeeme’, who was appointed to bruise the serpent’s head, that is, to spoil the 


GENERAL INTRODUCTION. sa 


tempter of his triumph, which could only be done by repairing the loss suffered by trans. 
sression. This original promise is the dawn of prophecy. Man was not driven from Para 
dise, until prophecy had given him some pledge of hope and consolation. 

It is not our intention to enter into an exposition of this first prophecy. Its general 
meaning is that a redemption will succeed the fall. The person of the Redeemer, The Prote- 
who is to bruise the serpent’s head, is not clearly revealed in the terms of the ea. 
prediction. We are not, however, to infer that our first parents had no more prophecy. 
instruction on the subject than that contained in the terms of the promise. Ged _ Gen. iii. 16 
may have communicated much to them, which the sacred historian has not recorded, 
Their faith may have been directed to One, whose sacrifice was typified by the sacri 
fices that they offered. 

This first prediction may serve to point out something of the general aim and design 
of all the rest. At the least, it opens to us one comprehensive subject, in which the 
whole human race is concerned. And since this subject was the first that introduced 
the revelations of prophecy, we may reasonably suppose that it was a principal one 
always in view, and that other predictions, when they did not specifically relate, might 
yet be subservient, to it, by promoting other purposes, which purposes, however, centered in 
the chief design. For prophevy having begun with the prospect of man’s redemption, could 
be directed, in its subsequent course, to nothing greater. And such the fact appears, when 
we draw to a point the multiplied predictions of the Old Testament. 

The limits and range of prophecy were as extensive at the first as they were afterward. 
The promise of the redemption of our race was given to Adam. This was aoa 
the first promise, and the last of the prophets could not go beyond it. For ang range of 
man’s redemption begun in the present world, and completed in heaven, is ἃ prophecy 
work which extends itself to the whole duration of his existence, and runs out W®T 38 ex 
. - . aes tensive at 
into the infinitude of the divine mercy. The scope of prophecy was, therefore, first -. they 
as large at the first as it was in later ages. No prophet, as has been intimated, were after 
ever went beyond redemption, though more precise discoveries of it were made Meee 
through every subsequent age of revelation. 

During the antediluvian period, there is no intimation, in the Mosaic narrative, of the 
prophetic gift. But in the New Testament, we have two distinct references to Other ante: 
such an exercise. ‘The first is 2 Pet. ii. 5, which speaks of Noah as a preacher diluvian 
of righteousness. He is not called a prophet in this passage, but merely a Prophecies. 
preacher of righteousness. The act, however, of building the ark, was clearly prophetic of 
the approaching deluge; and Noah doubtless accompanied his action by words, when 
preaching righteousness he called upon the people to repent, so that they might avert the 
impending wrath. The second is Jude 14, 15: “And Enoch also, the seventh from 
Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousand of his saints, 
to execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all 
their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches 
which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.” This was the warning, uttered by 
prophecy, of the coming catastrophe, which swept the sinners of the antediluvian world 
from the earth; and it is a warning against all the ungodly that a similar doom awaits them, 
unless they repent. 

The first general execution of God’s general judgment upon sin was the Flood, which 
formed an epoch dividing the old world and the new. So great a crisis of the world’s his- 
tory was not permitted to pass without the intervening warnings of prophecy. To the one 
righteous man and his family the deluge was foretold. The ark itself was a visible prophetic 
warning to a wicked world. 

The prophecy delivered to Noah, after the Flood, had reference to that overwhelming 
catastrophe. The occurrence of a heavy rain would naturally produce in the 

Ξ Η Prophecy 
minds of men the fear of a second Deluge. To relieve them from any such getivered to 
apprehension, and to assure them of an orderly succession and return of the Noah, imme 
seasons, God graciously promised to Noah, that “ While the earth remaineth, Bee atic 

Ά Ἢ e Flood. 
seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter shall not cease.” 
With this promise is connected a second grant to man of dominion over the creatures and 
aver the earth. To confirm this promise God set his “ bow in the cloud,” that it should 


1 Hengstenberg’s Okristology of the Old Testament, The Protevangelium, vol.i. p. 4. Edinburgh: T. ἃς T. Clark, 1858 


15 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 


“be a token of a covenant,” that “ neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters 
of a flood; neither shall there any more be a flood to destroy the earth.” Thus prophecy 
reflected its light from the bow that spanned the earth, after the waters had retired from ite 
surface, and gave to man the assurance of natural mercies and blessings (Gen. viii. 22; 
ix. 2, 9-17). 

«“ And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. 
Prediction of And he said, Blessed be the Lord God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his ser- 
Noah con- = vant. God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and 


ing hi : ; : : 
sons. Gen, ©anaan shall be his servant.” This passage contains a curse upon Canaan, anc 
ix. 25, 26, ἃ blessing upon Shem and Japheth. Both the curse and the blessing, as the 
cle tenor of the prophecy clearly shows, are not to be restricted to the individuals 


named, but extend to their posterity. Just as in the subsequent prophecies concerning Ish- 
mael, Jacob, Esau, and the twelve patriarchs, we look for the fulfillment among their de- 
scendants, so in the present instance we must look for it among the tribes and nations that 
sprang from these three sons of Noah. 

This prophecy announces a high degree of prosperity to Shem and Japheth. The na- 
ture of this prosperity is indicated, in regard to Shem, in two ways: (1.) God is not 
called by the name Elohim, expressive of his general relation to the world, but by the name 
Jehovah, which refers to his revelation and to his institutions for man’s redemption. (2.) 
Jehovah is styled the “God of Shem.” Both imply that God would sustain to the posterity 
of Shem a relation entirely peculiar, favor them with revelations of his will, and make them 
partakers of his temporal and spiritual blessings. 

The blessing pronounced upon Japheth (ver. 27), is differently understood by interpreters. 
The verb rendered “enlarge,” forms a paronomasia with the proper name Japheth, and 
means: to persuade, to entice, to allure. Hence some interpreters (see Calvin on the pas- 
sage) translate it thus: “ Alliciat Deus Japhetum, ut habitet in tentoriis Semi.” Other in- 
terpreters give to the word m5 the meaning, to be broad, and understand it in the sense 
that God shall give Japheth a numerous posterity, who shall possess widely extended ter- 
ritories. This is the interpretation of most of the ancient versions, and is the one most 
generally received. The accomplishment of this prediction has been pointed out in the 
tact, that the descendants of Japheth have not only gained possession of all Europe, but also 
of a large portion of Asia. 

Another difference of opinion has arisen in regard to the subject of the verb ]2t%). 


According to a very ancient interpretation DTT AS is to be supplied. The verse will then 
read: “God shall enlarge Japheth and shall dwell in the tents of Shem.” This would in- 
timate that, while God would enlarge Japheth, He would manifest himself in a peculiar 
manner to Shem. ‘Taking this view of it, the prediction would be fulfilled, when the She- 
kinah (derived from the verb, in this verse, rendered “ shall dwell”), the visible symbol of 
the divine glory, dwelt in the Tabernacle, afterward in the Temple, and finally in the highest 
sense, when “the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, the 
glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth” (John i. 14). This 
view, however, for exegetical reasons, has been rejected by the ablest critics, and Japheth is 
made the subject of the verb “ shall dwell.” ? 

Some, who take Japheth to be the subject, regard OW not as a proper name, but as an 
appellation — name, illustrious nagne, renown. “ May God give to Japheth an extended 
country, may he dwell in renowned habitations.” Gesenius adopts this view in his Hebrew 
Lexicon. (See Ges., Heb. Lez., s. v. ow.) But, Hengstenberg remarks, “It is in the 
highest degree unnatural to suppose that DW is here suddenly employed in a totally different 
meaning from that which it has in the verse before, and no one would resort to such an in- 
terpretation except from extreme necessity.” ὃ 

Abraham came originally from Ur of the Chaldees. When he was seventy-five years old, 
Callof Abra- the Lord said unto him: “Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, 
oe and from thy father’s house, unto a land that I will show thee: and I will make 


1 Hengstenberg’s Christology on Gen. ix. 18-27, vol. i. pp. 20-28. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1858. 
2 Ibid, vol. i. pp. 81-88. 
& Jbid, vol. i. p. 82. 


GENERAL INTRODUCTION 11 


of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou prophecy 
shalt be a blessing: and I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that as ar 
curseth thee; and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed. . . . . - 

And the Lord aj peared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy seed will I give this land ” (Gen 
xii. 1-7). 

In these promises, prophecy begins to make its larger revelations of the objects ‘of faith 
Two predictions are here made to him and repeated in Gen. xiii. 14-17; xv. 1—7, 13-16 
xvii. 1-8; xxii. 15-18. One of these relates to the possession of the land cf Canaan by 
his posterity ; and the other, to the universal blessing of mankind in him, and (xxii. 18) in 
his seed. 

This mixed subject requires distinct notice, since we have here the first point of union in 
prophecy of the Jewish and Christian dispensations ; and since from this era prophecy takes 
up and preserves a twofold character related to both. The possession of the land of Canaan 
by Abraham’s descendants identifies itself with the organization of the Hebrew people into 
a nation. It therefore leads us into that dispensation which includes the Law of Moses and 
the Theocracy, under which were transmitted the divine promises and revelations down to 
the era of the Gospel. This is the part of the divine economy resting on the promise of 
the land of Canaan. The universal blessing of the human race is the original promise made 
te our first parents. It is repeated and confirmed to Abraham, with the provision that the 
blessing of “all the nations of the earth” should spring from his seed. Through the me- 
diuin of this promise, and perhaps in other ways, Abraham saw the Saviour’s day and was 
glad (John viii. 56). 

Ishmael and Esau were the subjects of prophecy ; but as they are not in the line of the 
inheritance, and of “the seed,” it is unnecessary to say anything more than The promise 
barely to mention the fact. The case of Isaac and Jacob is different. They are made to 
in the line of the promise, and form distinct links in the chain of its fulfillment. a ie 
The promises made to Abraham were repeated and confirmed to them (Gen. Isaac and 
xxvi. 2-5; xxviii. 13-15; xlvi. 2-4). The prophecy (xlvi. 2-4) in part repeats, Jacob: 
in part fills up the one given to Abraham (xv. 13, 14). The addition made in the prophecy 
to Jacob is to show that Egypt was to be the land of the last intermediate abode and 
increase of his race, —a particular, which had not been specified before, but was now sup- 
plied at the time, when Jacob was invited by Joseph to go down to Egypt, during the 
famine. This was an important crisis in the history of his family, and required the inter- 
position of prophecy to calm his fears and explain to him the end that God had in view in 
the circumstances that induced him to remove from Canaan to the land of the Nile. 

Omitting the prophecy of Jacob respecting the sons of Joseph, we enter upon the consid: 
eration of that, delivered on his death-bed, concerning his own sons. He pre- prophecy of 
dicted to them distinctly some striking points in the future condition of the twelve Jacob on his 
tribes, which were to spring from them. These points were very unlike in their Seat 
kind, and comprised a variety of determinate particulars. The general scope of this prophecy, 
however, is that it is directed to the land of Canaan, and that it distributes the tribes in 
that country with a particularity of lot, under a geographical restriction, which makes 
it clear that Canaan is the field of the prophecy, even if the explanation were not sub- 
joined : “ Behold, I die; but God shall be with you, and bring you again unto the land of 
your fathers ” (Gen. xlviii. 21). 

A very remarkable feature of this prophecy is, that it foretoid that his twelve sons should 
be the founders of the same number of tribes, by a perpetuation of descendants to each. It 
was with reference to this fact that the inheritance of the land of Canaan was apportioned 
to them. That such a disposition of the inheritance should take effect, in all its particulars, 
would seem very improbable to any one viewing the matter from the contingency of a con- 
‘tinued male offspring to each of the sons, in a numerous and distant issue. But the grant 
was from Him, who divided to the nations their inheritance, and who, when He separated 
the sons of Adam, set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children 
of Israel] (Deut. xxxii. 8). Prophecy declared his purpose. 

The time of this prophecy is worthy of notice. The aged patriarch, under the divine 
command, had settled, with his family, in Egypt. The land of Goshen had been given 
te them for their use. The “new king over Egypt, who knew not Joseph,” had not 
yet appeared. Joseph was still governor of the land, and the prospects of his brethrer 

2 


13 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 


were more flattering than they could have been in the land of Canaan. Lest, therefore, tha 
antecedent predictions in regard to Canaan should be forgotten by their abode and domesti- 
eation in a foreign country, the most specific disclosure is made to them as to their subse 
quent enjoyment and partition of their inheritance, which had been originally assured te 
their fathers. This was the third time that the promise of their return from Egypt 
was given; and their minds were now turned more distinctly and forcibly to the object of 
God’s promise, by the distribution of Canaan among the twelve tribes, that were to spring 
from the twelve sons of Israel. ! 

Much has been written concerning that portion of this prophecy, which relates to Judah. 
The critical investigation of it does not fall in with our present purpose. It contains a 
prominent revelation of two things: first, the prolonged duration of power in the tribe of 
Judah, as distinguished from the rest ; second, the cessation of that power on the coming of 
Shiloh, to whom the gathering of the people should be. The meaning of the prophecy 
says Hengstenberg, ‘is, that the tribe of Judah should not lose the doimuior until he attain 
to its highest realization by Shiloh who should be descended from him, and to whom all the 
nations of the earth should render obedience.” ὦ 

There is a singular fitness in the union of this Messianic prediction with the other branches 
of the dying patriarch’s prophecy. For his prophecy is the first place in Scripture, which 
exhibits or implies the constitution of the twelve tribes, under which their state was after- 
ward to be moulded and governed. As soon as prophecy recognized this division and 
arrangement of the tribes, it set its mark upon that tribe, which was destined to have the 
preeminence over the others, and the privilege of a nearer union with the advent of Christ. 
When the form of tribes began to be seen, the Christian subject, in relation to those 
tribes, is immediately introduced. It was joined with the first general promise of Canaan ; 
it was joined with the partition of that land, and specifically with the tribal constitution. 

Patriarchal prophecy was a preparation for the covenant of Canaan. And because it 
Patriarchal WaS SO, there is on that account a great analogy seen to subsist in the distribu- 
prophecy @ tion of the light of prophecy, and the succession of the Mosaic and Christian 


vethecove. covenants. Patriarchal prophecy sustains very much the same relation to the 
nant of former, that later prophecy does to the latter. Not only is the promice of Canaan 
eae in patriarchal prophecy most explicit ; but the years are numbered te the begin- 


ning of the possession of it. Four hundred years were foretold to Abraham (Gen. xv. 13). 
A definite time was likewise foretold to Daniel (Dan. ix. 24, 25, 26, 27), The varied pre- 
dictions of patriarcnal prophecy tend to Canaan, as the predictions of later prophecy centre 
in the Gospel. This general analogy, which obtains in the structure of prophecy, in its two 
principal periods, — the one preceding the Law, the other subsequent to it, —may contribute 
to fix our judgment, in each case, of its use, and to illustrate the accordance and harmony 
in its most essential features. 

There is, however, a great difference in the prophecies of these two periods. Before the 
Law prophecy says nothing of Moses, the Jewish legislator, and the mediator of 
the covenant of Canaan. After the Law, when the people of Israel were in 
possession of the land promised to their fathers, prophecy abounds with predictions, not only 
of the Gospel covenant, but also of the Messiah. His person, his nature, his work, ana 
his character. This distinction is due to Him, who is Lord of all. “ Moses verily was 
faithful in all his house as a servant; but Christ as a Son over his own house” (Heb. iii. 
5, 6)? 

The deliverance from Egypt was the step, in God’s providence, preparatory to the 
Pai gteny institution of the Law, and to the possession of Canaan connected with it ; 
sontemporary and this deliverance itself was the accomplishment of one principal part of ante- 


A difference. 


with the —_ cedent prophecy. 

promulgation ἦ ἐ Η 

απ In its relation to the past the Law depended upon the Abrahamic covenant 
The Law (Gal. iii. 17-24). That covenant, as we have already seen, had a twofold char- 
a acter. It contained the spiritual promise of the Messiah, which was given to the 
earl Jews, as representatives of the whole human race, and as guardians of a treasure, 


in which all families of the earth should be blessed. This would prepare the 


1 Christology on Gen. xlix. 8-10, vol. i. p. 62. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1868. 
2 Davison On Prophecy, p. 70. Sixth Edition. Oxford, 1856. 


GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 19 


Jewish nation to be the centre of the unity of all mankind. But it contained apbrahamic 
also the temporal promises subsidiary to the former, and needed in order to Covenant. 
preserve intact the nation, through which the race of man should be educated and prepared 
for the coming of the Redeemer. These promises were special, given distinctly to the Jews 
as a nation, and, so far as they were considered in themselves, calculated to separate them 
from other nations of the earth. It follows that there should be in the law a corresponding 
duality of natzre. There would be much in it that is peculiar to the Jews, local, special, 
and transitory ; but the fundamental principles, on which it is based, must be universal, 
because it expresses the will of an unchanging God, and springs from relations to Him, 
inherent in human nature, and, therefore, perpetual and universal in their application. 

The nature of this relation of the Law to the promise is clearly pointed out. The belief 
in God as the Redeemer of man, and the hope of his manifestation as such in Relation of 
the person of the Messiah, involved the belief that the spiritual power must be the Law to 

; : : -- the Promise 
superior to all carnal obstructions, and that there was in man a spiritual element, 
which could rule his life by communion with a spirit from above. But it involved also the 
idea of an antagonistic power of evil, from which man was to be redeemed, existing in each 
individual, and existing also in the world at large. The Promise was the witness of the one 
truth, the Law was the declaration of the other. It was added because of transgressions. 
In the individual it stood between his better and his worse self; in the world, between the 
Jewish nation, as the witness of the spiritual promise, and the heathendom, which groaned 
under the power of the flesh. 

The relation of the Law to the future might be viewed under various aspects. But our 
object is to view it in its bearing upon the coming of our Lord and the dispensa- Relation of 
tion of the Gospel. In doing this we are guided by the general principle laid the Law to 
down in Heb. vii. 19: “the law made nothing perfect.” In its moral aspect it ὑπο ees 
bore the stamp of insufficiency. It declared the authority of truth and goodness over man’s 
will, and it took for granted the existence of a spirit in man, whieh could recognize that 
authority ; but it did no more. Its presence detected the existence and the sinfulness of sin, 
as alien alike to God’s will and man’s true nature; but, at the same time, if brought out 
with more vehement and desperate antagonism the power of sin dwelling in man as fallen 
(Rom. vii. 7-25). It only showed, therefore, the need of a Saviour from sin, and of an 
indwelling power, which would enable man to conquer the power of evil. Hence it bore 
witness of its own insufficiency and led men to Christ (Gal. iii. 24). 

The Law had relation to Christ in its sacrificial and ceremonial aspect also. The whole 
system of sacrifices was typical ; and on their typical character their virtue depended. The 
priesthood was typical. Sacrifices declared the need of atonement; the priesthood, the 
possibility of mediation; and yet in themselves they did nothing to realize either. Thus 
again the Law led to Him, who is at once the only Mediator and true sacrifice. In this way 
the Law, especially in its sacrificial and ceremonial aspect, was a standing prophecy of Christ. 
It trained and guided men to the acceptance of the Messiah, in his threefold character of 
Prophet, Priest, and King; and then its.work being done, it became, in the minds of all 
those who trusted in it, not only an incumbrance but a snare. ΤῸ resist its claim to allegi- 
ance was, therefore, a matter of life and death in the days of the Apostle Paul, and, in a 
less degree, in subsequent ages of the church. ‘“ Christ is the end of the law for righteous- 
ness to every one that believeth ” (Rom. x. 4). 

The first prediction concerning Christ after the promulgation of the Law, was that of 
Balaam, which was coincident with the approach of the Israelites to Canaan στ τ 

. wale ° : = Ξ redictions 
This diviner was summoned by the King of Moab to interrupt, by his curse, the goncerning 
progress of God’s chosen people. His will to that effect was not wanting ; but Christ short 
t was overruled. A word of true prophecy was put into his mouth, and he was εἶ ee 
tonstrained to bless those, whom he wished to curse. “I ‘shall see him, but not tion of the 
now; I shall behold him, but not nigh; there shall come a star out of Jacob, lw. Num. 
and a sceptre shall rise out of Israel, and shall smite the corners of Moab, and *”’ δ 
destroy all the children of Sheth.” 

Some have sought the star and sceptre of Balaam’s prophecy and professed to have 
found them in David. A sceptre may be found in him; but the sceptre and the star of the 
prophecy are probably to be found in Him, who is “ the root and the offspring of David, and 


1 Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, art. ** Law of Moses.” 


20 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 


the bright and mourning star”’ (Rev. xxii. 16). The vision of the prophet’s mind carried hin 
into futurity, and perhaps the expression, “I shall see him, but not now,” is expressive of 
something more than an ideal vision: it may be the mysterious foreboding of that real sight, 
which all shall have, when ‘“ He cometh with clouds and every eye shall see Him” (Rev. 
a). 

Though some deny the application of this prophecy to Christ, and think that it is com- 
pletely fulfilled in David, it is only, we think, in those points, wherein the kingdom of David 
is typical of that of the Messiah. Men in the age of David would not be likely to find its 
fulfillment in him; for they found in his time other predictions opening the designs of God 
to a greater extent. It was a principle of ancient prophecy that it was constantly advan- 
cing, in some or other of its prospects, until the point of rest was given to so many of them, 
in the advent and religion of Christ. 

“The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy 


brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken.” 
The prophet 


ies ants The scope of this prophecy is decided by its origin and occasion. The Israel- 
Moses. ites could not endure the voice and fire of Mount Sinai. They asked for an in- 
Deut. xviii. 


termediate messenger between God and them, who should temper the awfulness 
of his voice, and impart to them his will in a milder way. In answer to their 
prayer, God declares that they had well spoken, and that He would accordingly raise up 
unto them a Prophet such as they desired (Deut. xviii. 16, 17, 18). 

Three general views of this passage have found their separate advocates. The first is that 
ND) is used in a collective sense, and that it includes the prophets of all periods; the 


second, that it has exclusive reference to Christ ; the third, that 8°23 is used in a collective 
sense; but at the same time the promise is completely fulfilled only by the mission of Christ, 
in whom the idea of the prophetic order was eompletely realized. 

The context (vers. 20-22) would seem to indicate that an order and succession of prophets 
were contemplated ; but that is not inconsistent with the view, that the Prophet like unto 
Moses was to be some one Person, whose mission should be to reveal the divine will in a way 
differing from the terrors of the Law given from Mount Sinai. In this sense it is understood 
in the Gospel history (John v. 46, and i. 45; Luke xxiv. 44; Acts 111. 22, 23; Acts vii. 
37; Matth. xvii. ὅ).} So it has been understood from the earliest times by most interpreters 
in the Christian Church and by the older Jews. 

To justify its application to Christ the resemblance between Him and Moses has been 
drawn out into a variety of particulars, some of which may be regarded as fanciful. The 
great and essential characters of similitude between them are in the fullness and luminous 
intuition of their communications with God, the magnitude of the revelations made by them, 
and the institution of a religion founded upon these revelations. 

There is another resemblance included in the scope of the prediction, resting in a quality 
which began with Moses. Before his time the greater part of prophecy had been communi- 
cated in oracles and visions from God to individuals. When the patriarchs were inspired tc 
prophesy, it was only upon the occasion; they had no constant recognized office of that 
nature. ‘“ A prophet raised up from among his brethren,” and set forth as the declared in- 
terpreter of God’s will, a living oracle of divine communication, was unknown until the 
mission of Moses. In this particular he resembled Christ, the Prophet of the New Tes- 
tament. 

The circumstances, under which the children of Israel were organized iato a nation in the 


15-18. 


Temporal | Wilderness, are without a parallel in the history of any other nation. They were 
prophecy placed under the regimer of their law, obedience to which was strictly enjoined 
concurrent 


with the pro. Upon them. In case of disobedience, Moses, their prophet, denounced upon them, 
mulgationof along with the dissolution of their polity, captivity. and dispersion, sufferings of 
Sear unexampled severity (Deut. xxviii., xxix). 

It is a striking fact in the delivery of this prophecy, that it comes from the legislator of 
the commonwealth. It is concurrent with the foundation of that commonwealth. It is not 
like man’s wisdom to anticipate the downfall of his own works, at the moment when they 
come fresh from his hands. But it is like the wisdom of God to predict the fall of things 


1 Some of these references affirm only that Moses wrote of Christ. The pertinency of Matthew xvii 6 lies in the lag 
muse. “ hear ye him,” compared with the last clause of Deut. xviii. 15. 


GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 2) 


which are appointed to a great change, at a time when appearances are most remote from 
it, and when the state of things dictates other feelings and opposite anticipations. The ap 
proaching settlement of the chosen people in Canaan, is the time when their ruin and their 
expulsion from that land are introduced to view. In the land of Canaan they found a deri 
cile for their Law, and an investiture of their covenant; and then prophecy ceased for ἃ 
season. 

From Moses to Samuel there is an interval without prophecy; from Samuel to Malachi 
there is continuity of prophecy ; from Malachi to Christ there is another interval oe een 
without prophecy. prophecy be 

That there was an intermission of the prophetic gift may be proved by the fol- tween Moses 
owing arguments : — snd Samuel 

(1.) The silence of the sacred record. Proofs of the 

(2.) By the union of Samuel with Moses, when the prophets of God are men- intermission 
5 . of the pro- 
tioned together (Jer. xv. 1; compare Ps. xcix. 6). phetic gift 

(3.) By the implication of Paul, who reckons the government of the judges from Moses 
to Samuel, the prophet, as distinguished from them (Acts xiii. 20; compare fo Sentuel: 
iii. 24). 

(4.) By the express statement of the historic text, which informs us that “the word of 
the Lord was precious in those days: there was no open vision” (1 Sam. iii. 1). 

During the period of intermission, we read of Deborah, the prophetess; but her title to 
that name was probably due to her inspiration and to a call to government, or to her gift of 
composing sacred hymns. In the latter sense, Miriam, the sister of Moses, is styled a proph- 
etess (Ex. xv. 20). The prophetic power showed itself in her under the form of poetry, ac- 
companied with music and processions. 

There was a reason for this intermission of prophecy in the condition and circumstances 
of the people. During the period of cessation there was no change seriously or po. on for 
permanently affecting the constitution of the government. The people, it is true, this inter- 
were subject to many vicissitudes of fortune. When they sinned, God gave them mission of 
into the hands of their enemies; when they repented, He delivered them. But pail 
these vicissitudes did wot shake the frame of their polity, their priesthood, or their law. 
They were merely the exemplifications of the issue of obedience, or disobedience. They 
wave no destructive shock to their institutions. No change occurred of magnitude sufficient 
to demand the prophetic interposition. 

In the time of Samuel a different state of things arose. The commonwealth wore not only 
a disturbed appearance, but also approached the time of great innovations. A regal gov- 
ernment was to be set up; the priesthood was to be transferred; the kingdom was to be 
divided ; after which idolatry was established among the ten tribes; then followed a series 
of calamities ending in subjugation and captivity. In the midst of these calamities the 
Covenant was placed under such dubious and questionable circumstances as to render proph- 
ecy highly expedient to the elucidation of passing events, and to the instruction of men in 
regard to the future course and result of the divine proceedings. For it was one office of 
prophecy to give adequate information concerning the special institutions of God’s covenant, 
ind to predict the changes to which these institutions were from time to time subjected. No 
yrdinance of any importance was allowed to pass away without the express and definite an- 
nouncement of prophecy. This is verified in regard to the gift of Canaan, the Mosaic 
Covenant and worship, the Hebrew people as the peculiar people of God, the temporal 
kingdom of David, and the Temple. All these appointments have passed away, but none 
of them was abolished without the distinct announcement of prophecy. 

Corresponding to the disturbed state of the commonwealth of Israel and to the changes 
that were awaiting it, were the revival and subsequent enlargement of the pro- Tne proper 
phetic revelation. Prophecy took its stand at the commencement of these changes 8° of the 


: : hets, 02 

and innovations. As Moses was the prophet of the age of the Law, so wag gene το 

Samuel the prophet of the first age of the monarchy of Israel. predictive 
From the time of Samuel, prophecy is continuous and progressive. It proceeds, ProPnecy 


without any material chasm, or suspension of its revelations, through the succeed- the tirse of 
‘ng line of complex history, down to the days of Malachi, the last of the Old Samuel. 

Testament prophets, when it came to a close again for a long season, and interposed its otha 
yreat cessation prior to the Gospel advent. This, then, is the reign of predictive revelation, 


22 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 


From the and the proper age of the prophets. It is the middle period of the first dispen 
time of Sam- sation, standing equally removed, in time and in some of its characters, from th¢ 
see ἘΠ Law and from the Gospel; and the service of prophecy, during this period, 
progressive forms a connecting link of information between the two. It was a period that 
pemeee had its succession of inspired messengers following each other in order from first tc 

24 last; and it had its predictions embracing every remarkable change affecting the 
chosen people, as well as a continuation of predictive prophecy carried forward and reaching 
to the Gospel age. Its communications are also enlarged. It branches out in different di- 
rections. It enters into the Jewish, Christian, and Pagan subjects. The restricted Jewish 
subject comes first, as in the predictions of Samuel. The Jewish and the Christian are next 
combined, as in the prophecies of David and Isaiah. Afterward the Christian and Pagan 
are clearly and formally connected in the prophecies of Daniel. All these subjects, either 
apart or in union, are filled up from time to time with various accessions of prediction, ex- 
tending on every side the range of the revelation. 

In this series of predictions, one subject is prominent. It is the Christian. It is, of all 

_, others, the most frequently introduced and the most copiously treated. “To 
Re Christ give all the prophets witness.” Whatever matters they may treat of, to 
Him and his religion they direct our attention with a remarkable concurrence 
and agreement. The consummation of the designs of God in his particular covenant with 
the house of Israel, is referred to the days of the Messiah. The succession of the kingdoms 
of the earth is equally deduced to the Messiah’s Kingdom. It may, therefore, be truly said 
of prophecy and of its scope, that it presents the Redeemer and his everlasting Kingdom as 
its centre, and the end of the revelations of God. 

It has been already stated that, during the time of the Judges, the people of Israel were 
Prophecy in Subject to many vicissitudes of fortune; and that, at the close of that period, the 
the time of commonwealth was approaching a time of great innovations. In this crisis of 
Semel the Chosen People, second only in importance to the Exodus, there appeared a 
leader, second only to Moses.’ This was Samuel, to whom the Lord especially revealed 
Himself. He was the subject of divine communications when he was a child; and when ha 
grew up, “all Israel from Dan even to Beersheba knew that Samuel was established to be a 
prophet of the Lord” (1 Sam. iii. 20). The two books which give an account of the first 
establishment of the monarchy are called by his name, as fitly as the books which give an 
account of the establishment of the theocracy are called by the name of Moses. 

Samuel was not a founder of a new state of things, like Moses; but he was appointed to 
regulate the great change, which ensued in the choice of a king to rule over Israel. At 
first he remonstrated against the wishes of the people, but afterwards yielded by divine di- 
rection, and anointed Saul of the tribe of Benjamin. When Saul, for his transgression, was 
rejected, David, of the tribe of Judah, was anointed by the same hand to succeed to the 
throne. 

Samuel, as judge, was the representative of the past;? as prophet, he was the representa- 
tive of the new epoch, which was now dawning on his country. He is explicitly described 
as “ Samuel the Prophet.” “All the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after.” 
“He gave them judges until Samuel the Prophet.” The line of prophets, who followed in 
unbroken succession until the time of Malachi, begins with him. The prophetic institution, 
in its outward form, may be traced back to him. In his time we first read of a “company 
of prophets,” corresponding to what, in modern phraseology, are called “Schools ef the 
Prophets.” 

The characteristic of Samuel’s prophecy was almost exclusively of a civil nature, being 
directed to the public state of the Commonwealth of Israel. Its chief mission was to watch 
over the change introduced by the establishment of the kingly government. This Samuel, 
in his official character as prophet, did with diligence. He anointed, counseled, and di- 
rected Saul; and then by divine authority he appointed the sceptre to David. The traas- 
ference of the priesthood from the house of Eli, the other chief subject of his prophecy, is 
of a like kind; for it made no change in the religion of the Israelites, but only in the public 
ecclesiastical order of it. The distinctive character of prophecy, at this period, is, there- 


1 Dean Stanley’s Lectures on the History of the Jewish Church. Part I. p. 431. New York: Charles Senbner & 
Ocmpany. 1870. 

2 Some intimations, in the history of his times, would lead us to infer that he did not entirely relinquish the offer 
of judge after the accession of Saul to the throne (1 Sam. xi. 7; xiii. 8-14; xv. 13-35). 


GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 23 


fore, its civil nature. As such it was adapted to its time, but it was something differen* 
from the prophecy of almost every other period. The predictions of Samuel, considered in 
their adaptation to the circumstances of the time, could not be said to have been framed 
under favor of these cireumstances. For his predictions concerning Eli and Saul, the priest- 
hood and the throne, were delivered in the face of their power; his favorable prediction 
respecting David seemed to be beyond the range of human probability. His first prophecies 
challenged a jealous scrutiny ; his last was placed beyond the command of his influence and 
direction. In each case his authority, as a prophet, was strictly tried. 

Now the predictions of prophecy begin to take a wider range, and to present a greater 
variety of matter. Prophesy ΤΙ 

After the experience of so many changes and calamities, anxiety and doubt the time of 
might take possession of the mind of the Israelite, on the occasion of another P*¥4 
change,— the accession of David to the throne. This anxiety and doubt, did they exist, were 
removed by the interposition of prophecy. Having foreshown the exaltation of David, and 
the preéminence of his tribe, it proceeded to establish his house, and complete his greatness 
by a promise of the kingdom in his family. ‘The predictions to this effect are literal and 
clear: ‘“ Moreover I will appoint a place for my people Israel, and will plant them, that they 
may dwell in a viace of their own, and move no more; neither shall the children of wicked- 
ness afflict them any more, as beforetime, and as since the time that I commanded judges to 
be over my people Israel, and have caused thee to rest from all thine enemies. Also the 
Lord telleth thee that he will make thee a house. And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou 
shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy 
wels, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for my name, and I will 
stablish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son. 
If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the 
children of men: But my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul 
whom I put away before thee. And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for- 
ever before thee: thy throne shall be established forever” (2 Sam. vii. 10-16). The 
eighty-ninth Psalm dilates the same prediction. 

David’s life and reign were not peaceful. They were full of warfare and danger. He 
was persecuted by Saul and obliged to seek an asylum in an enemy’s land. His Meee. 
own son rebelled against him, and his subjects rose in insurrection. He was en- ae ay 
gaged in frequent wars with the surrounding nations. ‘These troubles continued contained in 
until he was advanced in life. He closed his career, however, in peace. But alee 
troublous as his own reign was, he had the prediction that his throne should be 
established, and that the reign of his son should be one of security and peace. ‘ Behold a 
son shall be born unto thee, who shall be a man of rest; and I will give him rest from all 
his enemies round about; for his name shall be called Solomon, and I will give peace and 
quietness unto Israel in his days ” (1 Chron. xxii. 9). This son the Lord chose to buiid a 
house for his name (1 Chron. xxviii. 3-6). We have here the stipulation of peace in the 
reign of Solomon, and of a long stability in his succession. These were the promises made 
to this chosen King of Israel, and, in him, to his people. 

But the temporal is only one of its subjects. In the person of David, prophecy makes some 
of its greatest revelations. In him, as in Abraham, the temporal and evangelical yy payid, as 
predictions are united. His reign is a cardinal point of their union, and of the in Abraham, 
entire scheme of prophecy in what has been called its double sense. He was a ean 
prophet himself, inspired to reveal many of the Christian promises. In the pro- temporal 
phetic psalms, the most of which are ascribed to David, the attributes of the m4 spiritual 
reign and religion of the Messiah are foreshown to us. We have set before us, a 
by the royal prophet, a King set upon the holy hill of Zion, his law, the opposition made 
to Him by the kings of the earth, their rage defeated, his sceptre of righteousness, his un- 
changeable priesthood, his divine Sonship, his death and resurrection, his dominion embra- 
«ing the whole world (Psalms ii., xvi., xlv., lxxii., Ixxxix., cx). 

As there is a great increase of prophetic light, during this period, subsequent prophecy 
dten reverts to it. There is no individual, one only excepted, of whom more is said by the 
erophets, than of David. “ The throne of David,” “the sure mercies of David,” are fre- 
quently mentioned in the progress of prophetic revelation ἢ and the single person, who formed 
the principal theme of the divine oracles, was He, who was both the Son of David and his 


24 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 

a a ee ΡΟΝ 
Lord, to whom the glory of David’s kingdom and the prophecies relating to it preéminently 
belong. 

As the Messiah was to be born of the seed of David, according to @he flesh, there was a 
tongruity in originating some of the clearest and most remarkable prophecies concerning 
Him, at the time of the exaltation of the house of David; for the Messiah was to be the 
heir of David’s throne, the King of Israel, the Ruler of the people of God. We observe the 
same order in the call of Abraham, and in the constitution of the tribes. When God first 
separated the family in which the Messiah was to be born, the seed of blessing was revea.cd 
to the founder and patriarch of that family. When the family began to divide and branch 
into tribes, the tribe of Judah was designated by prophecy as that from which Shiloh was to 
spring. When the kingdom of David is set up, the reign and power of the Messiah are 
brought into view. The congruity is not limited to the time of David’s exuitation, for he 
was a typical king. The evangelical end is not only foreshown with the temporal appoint- 
ment, but it is stamped upon it. In the house of David is founded a kingdom; but Christ 
has his kingdom, his protecting power and rule over the people of God, as truly as Solo- 
mon and other heirs of the house of David had theirs. The temporal kingdom bears some 
image to the other: they are two analogous subjects and fit to be combined together, as 
prophecy has combined them. This analogy and combination bring before us the double 
sense, as it has been called, of some prophecies, which is best explained by the principles 
of typology. 

The prophecies of this period, relating to the Messiah, partake principally of the regal 
character; and David, the king and prophet, is made the promulgator of them; and an ex- 
cellent provision was made for the expression, and to secure the memory of them in the 
language of poetry. They passed into the devotions, public and private, of the Church 
of Israel. 

It had been foretold that the reign of Solomon should be distinguished for its peace and 
prophecy in tranquillity. It was also distinguished for its wealth and power (1 Kings iv. 
the time of 20-26). David had subdued all the enemies of Israel; and in actual extent the 
Solomon. ~_ boundaries of the Chosen People, in the time of Solomon, did not reach beyond 
the conquests of his father. He had dominion over nearly all the territory comprised in the 
original grant to Abraham. “The Lord magnified Solomon exceedingly in the sight of all 
Israel, and bestowed upon him such royal majesty as had not been on any king before him in 
Israel” (1 Chron. xxix. 25). 

The greatest monument of Solomon’s reign was the Temple. It had been a command 
and a prediction that he should build this edifice in his days (1 Chron. xxii. 
8-11). This glorious fane was commenced under the auspices of prophecy (2 
Chron. vi. 16,17). The royal builder, at its dedication, made mention, in the hearing of 
all Israel, of past and subsisting predictions, which mention, in the hearing of those who 
could have given a ready contradiction, in case they were false, certified that they were ful- 
filled and known. 

The Temple itself was a prophecy. The building of it was directed for the reason that 
The Temple God had given “rest to his people,” and henceforth would not suffer them to 
itself a wander, or be disturbed, so long as they enjoyed the privilege of being his 
prophecy. people. ‘ Moreover I will appoint a place for my people Israel, and will plant 
them, that they may dwell in a place of their own, and move no more” (2 Sam. vii. 10). 
This promise of rest is connected with the Temple; for it was spoken by the prophet 
Nathan, when God confirmed the design of building it. A fixed sanctuary of their religion 
was the most appropriate pledge that they could receive of the stability of their national 
fortunes. It must have been a gratifying pledge to a people, who had been pilgrims in 
Canaan, strangers in Egypt, wanderers in the Desert, and who again, in Canaan, had sought 
a home for their religion, in the removals of their migratory Ark. ‘ Whereas I have not 
dwelt in any house since the time that I brought up the children of Israel out of Egypt, 
even to this day, but have walked in a tent and in a tabernacle” (2 Sam. vii. 6). 

It may be said that the Temple did not have a lasting continuance. The people were 
varried into captivity, and the Temple was destroyed. To this it may be replied that the 
Temple was never designed to act as a charm to avert the divine judgments, in case of dis- 
qbedience. It fell with the people and rose with them. It was the place which God had 
“chosen to set his name there.” It was the acknowledged and authorized eeat of their 


The Temple. 


GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 20 


worship, upon which their covenant stood. Except around that Temple the Israeiites have 
never been able to settle themselves as a people ; except in it, they have never been able ta 
find a public home for their nation and their religion. God made it their “resting-place” ; 
and if it exists no more, it is a proof that they have ceased to be his people. The long 
desolation of the Temple, and their removal from the seat of it, are, therefore, proofs that 
their polity and peculiar law have, in the purposes of Providence, come to an end. 

In case of disobedience, on the part of his people, God forewarned Solomon, that the 
Temple, which was to be a “resting-place,” on condition of obedience, should The destruc. 
be destroyed. “ But if ye at all turn from following me, ye or your children, He re pe 
and will not keep my commandments and my statutes which I have set before ΤΕΣ i 
you, but go and serve other gods and worship them; then will I cut off Israel mon, at ite 
out of the land which I have given them; and this house, which I have hallowed ‘edication. 
for my name, will I cast out of my sight; and Israel shall be a proverb and a by-word 
among all people: And at this house, which is high, every one that passeth by it shall be 
astonished, and shall hiss; and they shall say, Why hath the Lord done thus unto this land, 
and to this house?” (1 Kings ix. 6-8 ; see also 2 Chron. vii. 19-22). 

Such was the oracular communication from God to Solomon, on the completion of the 
sacred edifice. As Meses, the founder of the Commonwealth of Israel, was inspired to fore- 
warn the peorle, at the beginning of their national existence, of their future afflictions and 
dispersions, so the builder of the Temple, had foreshown to him, at the time of its comple- 
tion, a view of its destruction, by the avenging hand of the Almighty, as one of the special 
acts of his judgment against his people, in case of their disobedience and apostasy. 

The glorious empire of Solomon came to ruin. With all his wisdom, which has placed 
‘im above the wise of every age, he was guilty of much folly. He attained to ἘΣ ΤῊΝ ἐν 
the maximum of polygamy: his harem numbered “ seven hundred wives, prin- the dismem 
cesses, and three hundred concubines ” (1 Kings xi. 3). “ His wives turned away berment of 
his heart after other gods (xi. 4), and he introduced polytheism (xi. 5, 7). Thus aeeaaer 
was he led away from the paths of David, his father, “ and the Lord was angry 
with Solomon ” (xi. 9). Along with this depravation of morals and religion followed, natu- 
rally, a depravation of that just and wise policy of government, which had won for Solomon 
the admiration and love of his subjects. Oppressive burdens were laid upon the people, 
which produced discontent. 

These things provoked the Lord to anger, and He “said unto Solomon, Forasmuch as 
this is done of thee, and thou hast not kept my covenant and my statutes, which I have 
commanded thee, I will surely rend the kingdom from thee, and will give it to thy servant. 
Notwithstanding in thy days I will not do it for David thy father’s sake: but I will rend it 
out of the hand of thy son. Howbeit I will not rend away all the kingdom; but I will 
give one tribe to thy son for David my servant’s sake, and for Jerusalem’s sake which I have 
chosen” (1 Kings xi. 11-13). 

The glory of the kingdom of Israel ended with the peaceful and prosperous reign of 
Solomon. On the accession of his son, Rehoboam, ten tribes revolted and formed prophecy at 
a separate kingdom under Jeroboam. Judah and Benjamin adhered to the house the time of 
of David. This was a convulsion affecting the whole body of Israel. Their be here 
monarchy, so lately compacted, was rent in pieces; their public union, under the king- 
which they had been made subjects of the divine covenant, was broken; and a θαι. 
cause of discord was rooted between the members of the commonwealth, which God had 
planted in Canaan, in a community of country and religion. Such a change would raise a 
question of their covenanted relation. Where did the promises of God attached to that 
relation rest ἢ Did they rest with Israel? or with Judah, or with both? or were they for- 
feited ? Prophecy answered the question. The 2vent itself had been foretold in Solo- 
mon’s reign by the prophet Ahijah (1 Kings xi. 29-39). It was also preceded by many 
predictions, which supplied discriminating marks of the purposes of Providence now in oper- 
ation. There were Jacob’s predictions of the ascendency of the tribe of Judah, and the 
continuance of the sceptre with it until the advent of Shiloh (Gen. xlix. 8-10). There 
were the recent promises of favor to the house of David (2 Sam. vii. 12-16). There was 
the Temple at Jerusalem, the local seat of their religion. And last of all there was the 
ptophecy of Ahijah, which fully met the case, both in the particular form of the event, and 
n the reison of it. As to the event, the prediction of Ahijah limited the defection to 


50 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 


ten tribes, and fixed the time of it in the reign of Solomon’s son. The reasons of tha 
event were the corruptions introduced by Solomon (1 Kings xi. 88). The event was pre 
ceded, therefore, by the announcement of prophecy, sufficiently adequate to solve all questiens, 
in regard to the transmission of the covenant. 

It may be said that the partition of the kingdom might have been easily foreseen, inas- 
Rapig to ithe much as the ten tribes, in the time of David, had shown a disposition to act 


objection together, and to oppose themselves to the dominion of the tribe of Judah. 
ae aa Consequently they mght be expected, under provocation, to withdraw and form 
ition O e - . . . 

camer a separate government. To this it may be replied that the occasion and 


might have pretext of the revolt did not exist until after the prediction of it was delivered. 
eat It took its rise from the rigor of Rehoboam’s government; but it was foretold in 
means of the reign of Solomon, and foretold with a particularity, which existing political 
political cir- reasons could not warrant. Moreover, though the revolt took place, on the ex- 
cumstances. Gitement of human motives, it was established and confirmed against the current 
of such motives. God forbade the attempt to subdue it. “ But the word of the Lord came 
to Shemaiah the man of God, saying, Speak unto Rehoboam the son of Solomon, King 
of Judah, and to all Israel in Judah and Benjamin, saying, Thus saith the Lord, Ye shall 
not go up, nor fight against your brethren: return every man to his house; for this 
thing is done of me. And they obeyed the words of the Lord, and returned from going 
against Jeroboam” (2 Chron. xi. 2, 3, 4). 

The dismemberment of the nation became a safeguard of the prophetic evidence, by 
The dismem. Placing it under a jealous and divided care. The people of Samaria professed 
berment of | to receive the Pentateuch and to hold the Law of Moses. The predictions in 
the kingdom the Pentateuch, concerning the tribe of Judah, were, therefore, subjected to their 
5 safeguard Siete : 2 . Ξ : . 
of the pro. Tigid scrutiny. So also the prophecies delivered against them, after the dismem- 
phetic evi-  berment, by prophets sent from the kingdom of Judah. A prophet of Judah 
Hane: was sent to prophesy against the altar erected at Bethel by Jeroboam. Had 
no such prophet been sent among them, it would have been easy for them to prove it. This 
case is somewhat similar to the safeguard furnished for the accurate transmission of the 
Scriptures of the Old Testament by the jealousy of Jews and Christians. 

The moral cause of the disruption of the kingdom of Israel was idolatry (1 Kings 
rier xi. 33). Hence Jeroboam had a warning against the sin, which furnished the 
relating to occasion for the establishment of his kingdom. But he was no sooner seated on 
the king- the throne than, for political reasons (1 Kings xii. 26, 27), he founded a system 
eat ofthe of open idolatry ; and for its preservation he appointed a priesthood, and ritual, 

n tribes. “ ἔ 2 4 ? 

and erected an altar (1 Kings xii. 28-33). The golden calves in Bethel and in 
Dan were the public monuments of this apostasy. “Behold thy gods, O Israel, which 
brought thee up out of the land of Egypt,” was the creed of the new kingdom (1 Kings 
xii. 28). The enormity of this sin was that it made idolatry the national religion, whereas, 
in former times, its contaminations had been surreptitiously, sometimes openly, associated 
with the institutions of Moses. The people readily acquiesced in the king’s apostasy. Un- 
der the compact of this sin, he incorporated them in allegiance to his throne. Hence the 
Reason of the brand affixed to his seuuny: « Jeroboam, the son of Nebat, who made Israel 
to sin” (1 Kings xiv. 16). 

Prophecy did not remain silent in this crisis of wickedness. God sent his prophet from 
the land of Judah to pronounce sentence of condemnation upon the system of idolatry, 
which Jeroboam had established (1 Kings xiii. 1-10). This interposition of prophecy was 
for a sufficient cause. It was a timely remonstrance with the ten tribes in regard to the 

crime, which became the chief source of their growing corruption, and thereby the cause of 
their reprobation, misery, and ruin. The remonstrance was made on the scene of their 
offense, and accompanied with a miracle, which should have served as a memorial of reproof 
to meet the transgressor, whenever he came before the forbidden altar. But this warning 
prophecy was given without effect. From Jeroboam, the first king of the ten tribes, te 
Hoshea, the last, there is no king excepted from the imputation of “the general depravity. 
The whole line of kings is one of unmitigated irreligion and wickedness. King after king 
has this historic epitaph: “he did evil in the sight of the Lord.” 

A few righteous remained among the people. The prophet Elijah imagined that, like 
~the Seraph Abdiel, he only was “ faithful found among the faithless; ’ but Ged revealed 


GENERAL INTRODUCTION. "ἢ 


to him, that there were seven thousand in Israel, who had not bowed unto Baal (1 Kings 
xix. 18). 

The prophecy, during this period, was adapted to the prevailing irreligion. It abounds 
in commination and repruvi. The mission of the two great prophets, Elijah and Elisha, 
falls in the earlier part of this period —a mission directed chiefly to the kingdom of the ten 
tribes and its kings, and enforced by miracles to convince and awaken an apostate people. 
The duration of Elisha’s ministry reaches nearly to that of Jonah; and from Jonah we en- 
ter into the series of the prophetic canon. This is the continuity of prophecy. ‘There is 
also another proof of the same continuity, in the prophecy given to Jehu, during the minis- 
try of Elisha, that his children should reign after him to the fourth generation. This proph- 
ecy does not expire until after the prophecies of Amos and Hosea have begun; and these 
prophets begin to foreshow the destruction of the kingdom of Israel. Consequently the 
series of prophecy is so far complete. 

The result is that the kingdom of Israel has its entire history written in the perpetuity 
of its wickedness, as recorded in the ministry of its prophets. The general document is: 
“ Jeroboam drove Israel from following the Lord, and made them sin a great sin. For the 
children of Israel walked in all the sins of Jeroboam, which he did; they departed not 
from them; until the Lord removed Israel out of his sight, as he had said by all his ser- 
vants the prophets. So was Israel carried away out of their own land to Assyria unto this 
day” (2 Kings xvii. 21-23). 

The prophecies concerning Israel furnish a melancholy contrast to those relating to Judah. 
The case of Israel was to be hopeless: Judah was to be restored. 

At the time of the disruption of the kingdom, reason could not determine, for Temporal 

: . prophecy re- 
anything that then appeared, which would be the more prosperous, or stable of jating to 
the two. That of Samaria, her greater territory and numbers considered, seemed Judah, from 
to have the advantage. But prophecy supplied data, which would assist in form- eae 
ing a judgment concerning their comparative stability. We have already seen dom in the 
that there were promises on the side of the tribe of Judah and the family of nies ΒΞ 
David, which may be understood, by plain inference, to negative the hopes of the eee Babys 
other tribes. For these promises made to the tribe of Judah virtually cut off the lonian cap- 
other tribes by a speedier termination of their power. Ete 

But the question was not left to depend upon inference. It was decided positively by 
direct prophecy. Of the four greater and twelve minor prophets, whose books we find in 
the Canon of Scripture, the most ancient are Jonah, Joel, Amos, Hosea, and Isaiah. The 
prophecy of Jonah relates to the city of Nineveh. Joel speaks of coming judgments upon 
the land, of a restoration of Judah and Jerusalem from captivity, and of blessings upon 
them. Hosea speaks directly to the point, as it regards the relative destiny of the two king- 
doms. Speaking in the name of the Lord, he says: “I will no more have mercy upon the 
house of Israel; but I will utterly take them away. But I will have mercy upon the honse 
of Judah, and will save them by the Lord their God” (Hos. i. 6, 7). The whole book of 
this prophet inculcates the speedier dispersion and desolation of the house of Israel. Both 
Israel and Judah are threatened ; but the burden of his prophecy is upon Ephraim, Bethel, 
and Samaria. Amos wails in elegiac strains: “ The virgin of Israel is fallen ; she shall no 
more rise: she is forsaken upon her land; there is none to raise her up” (Amos v. 3). Isaiah 
predicted that “ within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken, that it be not a 
people ” (Is. vii. 8). Looking through his prophecies, we find predictions that Judah should be 
preserved. They were to fall under the power of the Assyrians; but they were to be deliv- 
ered (chap. x). They were afterward to ‘all into the hands of the Babylonians (chap. xxxix), 
But a restoration was to ensue, and the restorer is mentioned by name (xliv. 28 ; xlv.1). The 
medium of their restoration was to be the capture of Babylon (xlv. 1-3; Ixvii. 1-15; comp. 
chap. xiii.). The Medes and the Persians were to be the powers engaged in the siege (xili. 
17; xxi. 2). The city of Jerusalem and the Temple were to be rebuilt (xliv. 28). 

The most cheering evangelical promises were made during the decline, and Evangelical 
after the overthrow of the temporal kingdom. When the First Dispensation be- Lee 
gan to be shaken, the objects and promises of the second began to be substituted ruption of 
in its place. A new kingdom, and a new covenant are presented to view; and the kingdom 
the blessings and mercies, which are most peculiar to the expected dispensation, ἐπ δ ΕΞ 
are placed in a clearer light than ever before. The promises of them are also Babyleo 


28 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 


greatly multiplied. The evangelical teaching of the prophets, during this period, was an 
approach to the economy of the Gospel, which abolishes the ritual law and establishes the 
moral. In this light, it was a preparation for the future change. It also furnished oppore 
tune instruction to the people of Israel, at a time when the riuual law was rendered difficult 
or impracticable. On the one hand, there was intestine trouble; on the other, foreign in- 
vasion : their heathen enemies were beginning to spoil their land; the temple was about to 
be destroyed, and the public institutions of their religion were soon to be suspended. In 
this state of affairs, it must have been consolatory to the pious men of the nation to learn 
from the prophets, that personal religion was that, which God most esteemed, and which He 
had always preferred. Thus the prophetic teaching was adapted to the difficulties of their 
situation. 

During the first part of this period, there seems to have been a pause in evangelical 
prophecy. In the time of David large revelations concerning the Messiah were made; bu 
after the disruption, prophecy was directed to the state of the two kingdoms. The twe 
great prophets, Elijah and Elisha, were ministers of the temporal prophecy. Their mission, 
so far as we can gather from the records of their times, was confined to the Northern King 
dom, and it had passed before the Gospel subject appears again in view, unless some of the 
Psalms, of an unknown date and of a prophetic spirit, may be ascribed to this intermediate 
time. 

The other prophets, during this period, were Jonah, Joel, Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, Micah, 
Nahum, Zephaniah, Jeremiah, Habakkuk, and Obadiah. 

The book of Jonah contains no prediction of a direct Christian import. The subject of 
his prophecy is Nineveh. He was, however, in his own person, a type, or prophetic sign of 
Christ. The miracle of his deliverance from the belly of the whale was the type of Christ’# 
resurrection (Matt. xii. 40). Moreover, the whole import of his mission partakes of the 
Christian character ; for his preaching exemplified the divine mercy to a heathen city. ΤῈ 
brought the Ninevites to know “a gracious God, and merciful, slow to anger, and of great 
kindness, and repenting Him of the evil” (Jonah iv. 2). Whether all this is to be consid- 
ered a formal type of the genius of the Christian religion or not, it is certainly a real ex- 
ample of some of its chief properties, in the efficacy of repentance, the grant of pardon, and 
the communication of God's mercy to the heathen world. Viewed in this light, the book of 
Jonah forms a point of connection with the Gospel. 

The prophet Joel foretells, in the plainest terms, the effusion of the Holy Spirit (ii. 28- 
32). The Apostle Peter applies this prophecy to the descent of the Spirit on the day of 
Pentecost (Acts ii. 16-21). 

The prophet Amos predicts the restoration of the tabernacle of David (ix. 11), which the 
Apostle James refers to Gospel times (Acts xv. 15, 16). 

Hosea contains much of a Christian import cited by our Lord, by Matthew, and by Paul. 
Compare Matt. ii. 15, and Hosea xi. 1; Matt. ix. 18, and Matt. xii. 7 with Hos. vi. 6; Rom. 
ix. 25, 26 with Hos. ii. 23; and 1 Cor. xv. 55 with Hos. xiii. 14. 

Isaiah is styled by way of eminence the evangelical prophet. His book contains the 
scheme of the Gospel in its grand outlines. In it we have clearly set forth the mission of 
Christ; his divine nature; his supernatural birth in his incarnation; his work of mercy; 
his kingdom of righteousness; his humiliation, sufferings, and death; his atonement for sin 
made by his death; the effusion of the gifts and graces of the Holy Spirit; the universal 
diffusion of his religion; the blindness and incredulity of the Jews in the rejection of it; 
the adoption of the Gentile world into the Church; and the peace of the righteous in death 
(Is. vii. 14; ix. 6, 7; and all his later prophecies from chap. xl. to chap. Ixvi.). 

Micah foretells the birth-place of Christ; his divine nature; the promulgation of the 
Gospel from Mount Zion and its results; and the exaltation of Christ’s kingdom over all 
nations (Mic. v. 2; comp. Matt. ii. 6; iv. 1-8). 

The book of Nahum has no Christian prophecy, either direct or typical. It will be best 
understood as a continuation of, or supplement to the book of Jonah. The prophecy of 
both is directed against Nineveh. But that of Jonah was followed by the preservation of 
that city; that of Nahum, which abounds more in details, by its capture and destructicn. 
They form connected parts of one moral history, the remission of God’s juagment being 
Plustrated by the one, the execution of it by the other. 

Zephaniah predicts the restoration of Jerusalem, and the happy state of the pcople of 
fod in the latter days (chap. iii. 8-20). 


GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 29 


Jeremiah foretells the abrogation of the Mosaic law; speaks of the Ark as no more re« 
membered ; foretells the propagation of a more spiritual religion than the old; the media- 
torial kingdom of the Messiah, whom he calls “ Jehovah our righteousness ;” describes the 
elficacy of his atonement; the excellence of the Gospel in giving holiness as well as par- 
ton ; the call of the Gentiles; and the final salvation of Israel. (Jer. xxx. 9; xxxi. 15; 
comp. Matt. 11. 17,18; xxxii. 36-41; iii. 15-18; xxxi. 31-34; comp. Heb. viii. 8-12, and 
x. 16, 17; xxiii. 5, 6. There are many other passages, which perhaps refer directly to the 
restoration from Babylon; but they speak of it in such a way as to convey the idea that it 
is intended to be typical of a more glorious restoration.) 

In the book of Habakkuk there are two passages, which cannot be excluded from some 
relation to the Gospel. The first is, “ The just shall live by faith ” (ii. 4), cited in Rom. i. 
17 and in Heb. x. 38. Here we have a Christian principle, though the prophet probably 
had no particular Christian truth in view, when he uttered it. Faith — the habit of trust- 
ing in God, or in his revealed Word — is the principle of divine life; so, in every age, com- 
plete salvation has been a matter of faith rather than of sight. The other passage is chap. 
lii. 17, 18, which contains a confession of the prophet’s own faith —a faith separated from 
all earthly and temporal hopes. As such it is of a pure evangelical character. 

It is somewhat uncertain when Obadiah delivered his prophecy, but it was probably im- 
mediately after the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar. Some give it an earlier 
date. For our present purpose it is not important to determine the precise time. Its pre- 
dictions are directed against the Edomites. But verses 17-21 evidently refer to Messianic 
times. The fulfillment of these verses, Keil and Delitzsch affirm, can only belong to the 
Gospel dispensation, “and that in such a way that it commenced with the founding of the 
Kingdom of Christ on the earth, advances with its extension among all nations, and will 
terminate in a complete fulfillment at the second coming of our Lord.” 

It is a fact to be observed that prophecy, relating to heathen states and kingdoms, be- 
comes most copious and explicit in the time, when those states and kingdoms are Prophecy re- 
most powerful. When the people of God are threatened with invasion by these Here me 
heathen powers, or when they are groaning under oppression by them, then proph- tions during 
ecy foretells the overthrow of their power and the extinction of their glory. ‘The this period. 
success of the heathen was in some measure the triumph of idolatry ; for they were accus- 
tomed to ascribe the honor of their victories to their false divinities. The return of the vic- 
tor was the occasion of celebrating the praise of his idol. ‘The religion of the conquered 
partook of the disgrace of their defeat. Accordingly the memorials of these times of re 
proach and distress in Israel show how much the faith of men and the credit of true relig- 
ion were assailed by the boasts of their conquerors. The cry of the oppressed Israel was: 
“Wherefore should the heathen say, Where is now their God?” (Ps. Ixxix. and Ixxx.) 
“ Remember this, that the enemy hath reproached, O Lord, and that the foolish people have 
blasphemed thy name ” (Ps. Ixxiv. 18). ‘The ways of Zion do mourn, because none come 
to the solemn feasts: all her gates are desolate: her priests sigh, her virgins are afflicted, 
and she is in bitterness. Her adversaries are the chief, her enemies prosper” (Lam. i. 4, 5). 

The pious Israelite, under these mournful circumstances, derived his consolation from 
prophecy. The nations that oppressed him, had their rise, their victories, their changes 
and downfa!l delineated on the prophetic page. The controlling providence of God was 
thus explained, when it was most liable to be called in question. His people were most in- 
structed as to his ways and purposes, when their sufferings and their fears were at the great- 
est height. His moral government was illustrated in their own predicted afflictions, in the 
‘oretold victories of their present conquerors, and in their expected deliverance. 

The great use of prophecy concerning heathen nations was in part the same as that of 
ull other temporal prophecy, namely, to demonstrate the providence of God. The disclosure 
of an event before it took place would more forcibly exhibit the divine direction of things 
than an explanation of it after it had occurred; for it manifested the divine prescience, 
counsel, and ordination together, 

Had the prophets confined their revelation to the affairs of the Hebrew people, the proof 
of God’s providence would have been imperfect; for his overruling sovereignty, in the 
sphere of other kingdoms, might have remained a question. But the revelations of proph- 
ecy resolved every doubt in regard to the matter. They proclaimed his universal provi- 
dence and sovereignty over all nations. “Thus saith the Lord te his anointed, to Cyrus, 


30 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 

whose right hand I have holden, to subdue nations before him ; and I will loose the loins of 
kings, to ofen before him the two leaved gates; and the gates shall not be shut; I will ge 
before thee, ana nake the crooked places straight: I will break in pieces the gates of brass, 
and cut in sunder the bars of iron” (Is. xlv. 1, 2). “The Most High ruleth in the king- 
dom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will. Whose dominion is an everlasting do- 
minion, and his kingdom is from generation to generation ” (Dan. iv. 32-34). 

The state of religion, in the heathen world, rendered this exercise of prophecy expedient 
For one of the most prevalent notions of false religion was that of local and tutelary deities 
Polytheism set up its gods over particular regions, or kingdoms, within which it cireum- 
scribed their power. Under such an idea, the God of Israel might have appeared the deity 
of one place, or people. Hence the expediency of declaring his universal sovereignty. 

There was, moreover, in the heathen world, a universal reverence paid to oracles, or sys- 
tems of divination. These had their origin in the natural desire of seeing into futvrity, 
which may sometimes have been abused by the craft of policy, and which of itself degener- 
ated into the superstitions of augury, necromancy, and other forms of delusion. To the 
Israelite all these modes of exploring futurity were forbidden, as the devices of heathenism 
(Deut. xviii. 14; Lev. xix. 31). But the prohibition was made reasonable by the genuine 
gift of prophecy, which showed the omniscience of God in the affairs of those countries, in 
which the oracles of superstition were consulted. “For these nations, which thou shalt 
possess, hearkened unto observers of times, and unto diviners: but as for thee, the Lord thy 
God hath not suffered thee so to do” (Deut. xviii. 14). This was the practice of the an- 
cient Canaanites. The Egyptians and the Chaldeans, in a later age, infused more of the 
mystery of pretended science into the same kind of superstition. But the inspired proph- 
ets of Israel furnished the antidote and the refutation of all this science, when they could 
contrast with its falsehood the truth of their own predictions. ‘“ Thus saith the Lord, that 
frustrateth the tokens of the liars, and maketh diviners mad, that turneth wise men back- 
ward, that maketh their knowledge foolish; that confirmeth the word of his servant, and 
performeth the counsel of his messengers” (Is. xliv. 25, 26). By this test God vindicated 
his own foreknowledge, and put the pretenses of human skill, and of idol oracles to confusion. 

Prophecy relating to the heathen nations commenced at a very early period. The remote 
judgment of God upon Egypt was revealed to Abraham (Gen. xv. 14); he had an intima- 
tion that it would fall upon the Amorites; and he witnessed the nearer judgment upon 
Sodom and Gomorrah. These were nations placed within his view and connected with the 
future state of his family, the Hebrew people. ‘The revelation, thus opened to Abraham, 
continued, in subsequent times, to hold the same order; for the temporal prophecy con- 
tinued to embrace the Hebrew Church and nation, and other states and kingdoms, so far as 
the people of Israel were affected by them, or could see the tenor of God’s providence illus- 
trated in their history. “Shall I hide from Abraham that thing which I do?” (Gen. xviii. 
17), is the introduction *o the prophecy which revealed to the Father of the faithful the doom 
of Sodom and Gomorrah. Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but He revealeth his 
secret unto his servants the prophets” (Amos iii. 7). This is the range of prophecy con- 
cerning his own people. “1 ordained thee a prophet unto the nations” (Jer. i. 5). This is 
the mission of Jeremiah at the time when prophecy took its largest scope among the king- 
doms of the earth, and when God’s government and providence were to be most conspicu- 
ously displayed in their rise and fall, their conquests and desolations. In the time of Moses 
the like union of prophecy concerning the heathen nations with that concerning Israel may 
be observed; and thoughout the principal age of prophecy from Samuel to Malachi, the 
connection is constantly maintained. There is then a general consistency in the prophetic 
system, in this particular of it; and the analogy begins in the revelation to Abraham, to 
whom was exemplified the entire scheme of prophecy, in its simplest form, in all its parts, 
Christian, Jewish, and Gentile. 

The principal heathen nations that were made the subject of prophecy were the Egyp- 
tians,! Edomites,? Moabites,? Ammonites,* Philistines,© Tyrians,° Assyrians,’ Baby’ onians,® 
Persians,’ Greeks,!® and Romans. The predictions against these nations were mostly given 
amidst the decays of the Jewish covenant, and were intended to rebuke the pride of th¢ 


1 Ezek. xxix, 14, 15. 2 Jer. xlix. 8 Jer. xlviii. 4 Ezek. xxv. 2-1). 
6 Ezek. xxv. 15-17. 6 Is. xxiii. 7 Is. xxx. 27-83. Nahum. 8 Is. xxi. 1-10 " xivil. 
® Jer xlix. 34-39; Dan. ii., vii. 10 Dan. ii., vii. 11 Dan. ii., vii. 


" 


GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 31 


nations, to administer consolation and instruction, and above all to lead the thoughts of men 
to that Kingdom which cannot be moved. In the midst of the captivity Daniel saw in 
symbol the character and overthrow of the great monarchies of the earth, and in vision he 
beheld the Ancient of days ascend the throne of universal dominion. 

The captivity in Babylon, as we have already seen, had been foretold. It was, therefore, 
a fulfillment of preéxisting prophecy. It was a severe and remarkable dispensa- Prophecy 
tion of Providence. In former times the people of Israel had suffered great uring the 
calamities. They had often been brought under the power of their enemies; c#ptivity in 
the ark, the symbol of God’s presence, had been carried, for a short time, into ae 
the land of the Philistines. But the captivity was the severest blow that had hitherto 
befallen them. Their land was laid waste; their ark was destroyed; their temple was 
burned to the ground; and Jerusalem was reduced to ashes. “ How hath the Lord covered 
the daughter of Zion with a cloud in his anger, and cast down from heaven unto the earth the 
beauty of Israel, and remembered not his footstool in the day of his anger! The Lord hath 
purposed to destroy the wall of the daughter of Zion ; He hath stretched out a line, He hath 
not withdrawn his hand from destroying ; therefore He made the rampart and the wall to 
lament; they languished together. Her gates are sunk into the ground ; He hath destroyed 
and broken her bars; her king and her princes are among the Gentiles ; the law is no more; 
her prophets also find no vision from the Lord” (Lam, ii. 1, 8, 9). 

The prophets, during the captivity, were Jeremiah, only in part, Ezekiel and Daniel. 
The prophecies of Jeremiah have already been mentioned ; and it is not necessary Prophets 
to refer to them again. He was allowed his choice either to go to Babylon, during the 
where he would doubtless have been held in honor at the royal court, or to re- ines 
main with his own people. He chose the latter. Subsequently he endeavored to persuade 
the leaders of the people not to go to Egypt, but to remain in the land, assuring them, by a 
divine message, that if they did so, God would build them up. The people refused to obey, 
and went to Egypt, taking Jeremiah and Baruch with them (Jer. xliii. 6). In Egypt he 
still sought to turn the people to the Lord (xliv.) ; but his writings give no information 
respecting his subsequent history. It is asserted that the Jews, offended by his faithful 
remonstrances, put him to death in Ezypt: Jerome says at Tahpanhes. 

The duration of the captivity was foretold by Jeremiah (Jer. xxv. 11, 12. Compare Dan. 
ix. 2). Seventy years were to be accomplished in the desolations of Jerusalem. ‘Temporal 
Ezekiel, who, like Jeremiah, was a priest as well as a prophet, was carried away prophecy 

: = - during the 
captive eleven years before its destruction by Nebuchadnezzar. When he was  ¢gantivity 
among the captives by the river Chebar, “the heavens were opened and he saw both Jewish 
visions of God” (chap. i. 1). Bnd Pagal: 

The predictions of Ezekiel were delivered partly before and partly after the destruction 
of Jerusalem, which calamitous event forms their central point. Before this sad calamity 
his chief object was to call to repentance those who were living in careless security ; to 
warn them against indulging the hope that, by the help of the Egyptians, the Babylonian 
yoke would be shaken off (chap. xvii. 15-17); and to assure them that the destruction 
of their city was inevitable and fast approaching. After the destruction of the city his 
principal care was to console the exiled Jews by promises of future deliverance and restora- 
tion to their own land. 

The predictions of Ezekiel are remarkably varied. He has instances of visions, 


—~—- “ When, by the vision led, 
His eye surveyed the dark idolatries 
Of alienated Judah;”’ 1 


(chaps. viii—xi.) ; symbolical actions (iv. 8); similitudes (chaps. xii., xv.) ; parables (xvii.), 
proverbs (xii. 22; xviii. 1 ff.) ; poems (xix.) ; allegories (chaps. xxiii., xxiv.) ; open proph- 
ecies (chaps. vi., vii., xx., etc.). 

In his predictions against the heathen nations, he confines the number of these nations to 
seven. This was probably intentional on the part of the prophet, otherwise we would 
scarcely find Sidon separately brought forward alongside of Tyre, xxviii. 20 ff. (Ewald, p. 
807; Hitzig, p. 187.) Also the order in which these prophecies stand connected, deviating 
as it does from chronological sequence, has a deeper foundation in the subject-matter. “ First 


1 Milton, Paradise Lost, book i., lines 455-457. 


89 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 


the judgment is predicted against the neighboring nations, Ammon, xxv. 1--7; Moab, vers 
8-11; Edom, vers. 12-14; and the Philistines, vers. 15-17; these rising up in open enmity 
x0 the theocracy, represent in this the might of heathendom, as it has turned away from 
God, and is arrested in the very act of rebellion against Him.” Then follow the prophecies 
against Tyre and Sidon (xxvi—xxviii.). “In Tyre is represented the image of vain-glory, 
and of fleshly security, which looks away from God, and thus plunges ever deeper into 
the sinfulness and inanity of the natural life.” « Finally, both of these sides meet together 
in Egypt (xxix.—xxxii.), that ancient enemy of the covenant people, now strengthened so as 
to become one of the empires of the world, and as such taking its stand in unbending defiance 
and vain-glory ; yet now, like all the rest, on the point of being hurled down into an abyss 
from the summit of its ancient splendor ” (Hiiv., Comm., p. 405). 

The position of the prophecies against the foreign nations, in the middle between the 
threatening predictions before Jerusalem was destroyed and the announcements of salvation 
after this catastrophe, is due to the internal bond of connection, which is real and causal. 
It is brought about by means of the following thought: “ Though the covenant people fall 
under the heathenish worldly power, still this is not a. victory of heathenism over the true 
theocracy. Far from this, heathenism, with all its might and glory, must fall; and on the 
other hand the theocracy shall rise again from its ruins to new life in glory.” (Comp. Hiiv., 
Comm., p. 404.}} 

“ The book of Daniel bears the same relation to the Old Testament, and especially to the 
prophets, as the Revelation of John to the New, and especially to the prophetic sayings of 
Christ and his Apostles. Daniel is the Apocalypse of the Old Testament. Other books of 
the Old Testament as well speak of the great Messianic future ; other books of the New 
Testament as well speak of the second coming, or Parousia of Christ. But, while the other 
prophets bring only the particular situation of the people of God at the time into the light 
of prophecy, and while the Apostles give disclosures on special eschatological points, as the 
wants and necessities of their readers demand them; Daniel and the Revelation of St. John 
are not so much called forth by a temporary want, and given for a special end, but they have 
the more general aim of serving as prophetic lamps to the congregation of God in those 
times, in which there is no revelation, and in which the Church is given into the hands of 
the Gentiles (καιροὶ ἐθνῶν, Luke xxi. 24). We have thus recognized Daniel as the light 
which was sent for the comfort of those who were “ wise,” to lighten the darkness of the 
half millennium, from the Captivity till Christ and the destruction of Jerusalem by the 
Romans. And, in like manner, the Apocalypse of John was given to the saints of the new 
covenant, as a guiding star, to lead them on their pilgrim’s journey through the world, from 
the first coming of Christ, or rather, from the destruction of Jerusalem till his second coming, 
when He shall establish the Kingdom of glory (comp. Tit. ii. 11-13; Rev. i. 7; xxii. 17, 20). 
The last days indeed form also the subject of Daniel’s visions (chaps. ii. and vii.), and there- 
fore we must necessarily expect an intimate connection between these chapters and the 
Apocalypse. But, while Daniel writes for Jews, and from the Old Testament stand-point, 
John, standing on New Testament ground, writes for Gentile Christians, a difference rich in 
consequences. 

“ Such being the object for which the Apocalyptic books were given, ‘t will easily be seer 
why there is, strictly speaking, only one Apocalypse in each Testament, though there are 
many prophets in the Old, and many prophetical disclosures in the New. There are two 
ereat periods of revelation, that of the Old and that of the New Testament. And each of 
these is followed by a period without revelation; that which succeeded the exile, and that 
which succeeded the Apostles (the Church-historical period). The Apocalyptic books are 
the two lights which shine out of the former periods into the latter. And hence, each Apoc- 
alypse is among the latest works of its respective Canon; it is wvitten at a time when rev- 
elation, about to lapse into silence, gathers once more its whole strength into a final. effort. 
We are taught this by the very name Apocalyptic. It is from ἀποκάλυψις (Rev. i. 1), a 
revelation in a peculiar emphatic sense, needed for the times without revelation ; a guiding- 
star in the times of the Gentiles.” ? 

At the very beginning of the book of Daniel we find the opposition between Israel and 
he heathen world-power, and more particularly that power in the stage of its development, 


1 Introduction to the Old Testament. Keil, vol. i., pp. 860, 861. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1869. 
2 The Prophecies of Daniel, pp. 70, 71. By Carl August Auberlen. Andover: Published by W. Ε. Draper, 1857. 


GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 33 


which commences with the Babylonian exile, which forms the historical basis of Daniel’s 
prophecies. ‘The book opens with a statement of the beginning of the captivity (i. 1, 2): 
and mentions (ix. 2) its termination. 

“ The new revelation which the people of God required for the period beginning with 
the Babylonian captivity, was to teach them how to regard the powers of the world which 
they were to obey ; to teach them their nature and purpose, and then to show them the re- 
lation in which the work of salvation which was to begin in Israel, stood to them. A new 
subject was thus given to prophecy, which, in the nature of things, could not have beer 
given before the captivity, but which now forced itself, as it were, by an internal neces 
sity.” } 

Chap. ii. contains an emblematic representation of the kingdoms which form the chief 
subject of the book. The image, which Nebuchadnezzar saw, represents the Babylonian 
monarchy under his own dynasty, the Medo-Persian empire, the Grecian, and the Roman. 
The last is divided into ten kingdoms, and gives way to the kingdom of the Messiah, repre- 
sented by a stone cut out without hands, which became a great mountain, and filled the 
whole earth. In later chapters, one or other of these kingdums again and again appears. 

In chap. vii. the first four of these kingdoms are represented by beasts, all highly signifi- 
cant. So they appeared to Daniel, whose eye was spiritualized. Of the ten kingdoms inte 
which the fourth is divided, three are subdued by a little horn (ver. 8). Tlie power repre- 
sented by the little horn exercises its tyranny until the triumph of the saints. This view 
of the four empires has special reference to their religious connections, as the former view 
had to their political. 

Chapters viii., x., xi. contain prophecies concerning the Medo-Persian and Grecian empires 

From this brief outline of the temporal prophecy of the book of Daniel, it will be seen 
that it throws a prophetic light over the whole future. The great world-powers pass away, 
and the scene closes with the universal establishment of the kingdom of the Messiah. 

The book of Ezekiel is not directly quoted in the New Testament; but in the Apocalypse 
there are many allusions and parallels to its closing chapters (xl—xlviii.), which  ypcgianic 
contain symbolical representations of the Messianic times. Other portions of prophecy 
his prophecies, of a general Messianic character, are chap. xxxiv. 11-19; and SHE ag 
chaps. XXXVi.—xxXxix. rec 

Daniel foretells the coming of the Messiah, the atoning power of his sufferings (ix. 24- 
27), and the universal dominion, which is to be given to Him over all the kingdoms of the 
world (chaps. ii. and vii.). In this apocalyptic book the kingdom of God takes, in the per- 
son of the Son of Man, the place of the kingdom of the world. 

The Son of Man, in Daniel, is not the people of Israel, as some expositors have affirmed, 
but the Messiah. This is evident from the fact that He comes with the clouds of heaven, 
which cannot very well be predicated of the people of Israel. Again, the saints are men- 
tioned in the vision (ver. 21) ; if then they are introduced in person, they cannot be repre- 
sented by the Son of Man. The expression Son of Man must, therefore, be taken to desig- 
nate the Messiah, and to designate his people only secondarily, and as represented by Him 
(comp. Gal. iii. 16-28; 1 Cor. xii. 12). 

“It is quite in keeping,” says Auberlen, “with the universal horizon of Daniel's prophecy, 
that Messiah is not designated as the son of David, but in general, as the Son of Man; no 
more as King of Israel only, but as king of the world. The prophetic horizon has returned 
to its original extent, as it was in the Protevangel in Paradise. There, as now again here, 
all mankind — humanity — was within the field of prophecy.” 

This brings us “ to view the picture of the Messiah presented by Daniel, in its relation to 
the prophecy, which immediately precedes it. From the view we have already given of the 
history of Israel, it will appear to the careful reader that, in the development of the Old 
Testament Theocracy, the Babylonian captivity is the exact counterpart to the epoch of 
David. This one epoch is the culminating point of the glorious exaltation of the people of 
he covenant, the other of their deepest humiliation. Hence the types with which the king 
dom of David has furnished Messianic prophecy, disappeared at the time of the exile, which 
substituted others in their place. These types are twofold, as would be expected from the 
nature of the case. On the one hand, the sufferings of the people are reflected in the pic- 
‘ure of the suffering Messiah; and this is the basis of the prophecy of the servant of Jeho 

1 The Prophecies of Daniel, p. 20. By 5.1 August Auberlen. Andover: Published by W. F. Draper. 1857. 
3 


94 GENERAL INTRODUCTION 


vah, which Isaiah beheld in his visions (xl.-lxvi.). To this class, also, the ninth chapter of 
our book belongs. On the other hand, in this very time of suffering, the truth that in the 
kingdom of God the cross is the only way to glory, shines forth more brightly than ever be- 
fore, and there is a lively hope that after “the scattering of the power of the holy people ” 
is accomplished (Dan. xii. 7), the kingdom of God will be set up among men with a power 
and extensiveness previously unknown. This is the prophetic vision of the Son of Man 
(Dan. vii.). All these expressions are equally significant. Servant of God denotes zealous 
and patient obedience to God: Son of Man refers to the ground on which man is to obtain 
again that original destiny and dignity as head of creation, which was conferred upon him 
(Gen. i. 26-28.) Both designations of the Messiah have taken the place of the Davidic 
type. The Messiah is no longer represented as the Theocratic King coming to the coy- 
enant people, but He appears a centre of unity both for the covenant people and the Gentile 
world. We see here a similar progress to that which took place in the times of the Apostles 
from Judaism to Christianity. It will be easily seen that this progress is intimately con- 
nected with the historical position of the people during the captivity.. Even in the picture 
of the Messiah during the Davidic period, the two sides of suffering and victory begin to 
appear prominently. The Messianic psalms are divided into psalms of humiliation and of 
triumph. And what we here see in its germ, we afterwards see fully developed at the time 
of the captivity. On the one side the atoning power of Messiah’s sufferings is disclosed 
(is. liii. and Dan. ix.); on the other there is revealed that dominion of the Messiah which, 
in the development of universal history, is given to Him over the individual kingdoms of 
the world (Dan. ii. 7). Prophecy has thus gained not only in depth, but in breadth of 
view.” ! 

At the close of the seventy years’ captivity (the time predicted by Jeremiah, xxv. 12 
Propheey 2d xxix. 10), Cyrus “made a proclamation throughout all his kingdom and 
from theend put it also in writing, saying, Thus saith Cyrus King of Persia. ‘The Lord 
ae ae God of heaven hath given me all the kingdoms of the earth; and He hath 
tivity to the Charged me to build Him a house at Jerusalem, which is in Judah. Who is there 
time of Mal- among you of all his people? his God be with him, and let him go up to Jeru- 
cane cp salem, which is in Judah, and build the house of the Lord God of Israel (He is 
the Old the God), which is in Jerusalem. And whosoever remaineth in any place where 
es he sojourneth, let the men of his place help him with silver and with gold, 
Sic) and with goods and with beasts, besides the free-will offering for the house of 
God that is in Jerusalem” (Ezra i. 1-4; compare Isaiah xliv. 28, and xlv. 1-5). 

This edict of Cyrus was founded upon the prophecy of Isaiah; but how he became ac 
quainted with that prophecy we are not informed. He certainly was acquainted with it, for 
his proclamation was a public recognition of it to his empire. As such, it would draw notice 
to the prediction of Isaiah, and tend to spread something of the knowledge of the true God 
wherever it was conveyed. But however this might be, it had one certain and important 
use in securing the favor of succeeding kings of Persia to the Hebrew people, for the safety 
of their affairs, and the complete restitution of their city and temple (Ezra v. 138-17; vi. 1- 
15; ix. 9). To this subject and the annunciation of the Gospel the pr édictions of the post- 
exile prophets are almost entirely confined. These prophets are Haggai, Zechariah, and 
Malachi. 

The return of the Jewish people from Babylon, and their reéstablishment in their own 
Temporal land, were not beheld with favor by the Samaritans and other surrounding en- 
prophecy of emies. The rebuilding of their temple and of their walls was forcibly inter- 
this period- rupted and delayed. The struggle affected their restoration as a Church and a 
people, and hazarded the exercise of their religion. But prophecy supplied the encourage- 
ment, which the conflict of their fortunes required. It did so by assurances of the repres- 
sion of their enemies, and complete reéstablishment of their city, temple, and public peace. 

Haggai delivers four prophetic messages (i. 1; ii. 1; x. 20), three of which are intended 
to reprove the Jews for neglecting the temple, and to promise that the divine favor will at- 
tend its erection. The fourth, addressed to Zerubbabel, the head and representative of the 
family of David, and the individual with whom the genealogy of the Messiah began after 
the captivity, promises the preservation of the people of God, amidst the fall and ruin of the 
kingdoms of the world. 

1 The Prophecies of Daniel. By Carl August Auberlen. Andover: Published by W. F Draper 1867. 


- 


GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 90 


Zechariah, also, speaks words of comfort to encourage the hearts of his countrymen 
“ Thus saith the Lord; I am returned to Jerusalem with mercies: my house shail be built in 
it, saith the Lord of hosts, and a line shall be stretched forth upon Jerusalem. My cities 
through prosperity shall yet be spread abroad ; and the Lord shalt yet comfort Zion, and 
shall yet choose Jerusalem” (Zech. i. 16,17). “For thus saith the Lord of hosts; As I 
thought to punish you, when your fathers provoked me to wrath, saith the Lord of hosts, 
and I repented not: so again have I thought in these days to do well unto Jerusalem and 
to the house of Judah: fear ye not” (Zech. viii. 14, 15). Such is the scope of Hageai and 
Zechariah’s predictions as they relate to the affairs of the Jewish people. 

Along with their predictions concerning the rebuilding of the temple, the post-exile 
prophets introduce Messianic and evangelical prophecy. In Zechariah especially Messianic 
we find portrayed, in mystic vision and by typical representation, the kingdom Ἢ cilia 
and priesthood of Christ, the establishment of the Christian Church, and the con- ecy during 
course of nations resorting to the future temple. In this we have a second ap- this period. 
plication of the same systematic form of prophecy, which was employed in the establish- 
ment of the temporal kingdom. The nearer subject, in each instance, supplies the prophetic 
ground and the prophetic images for the more remote Christian subject. In the first in- 
stance, the kingdom of Christ is delineated in connection with, and by analogy to, the actual 
kingdom, which was seen rising to view; in the second instance, his personal priesthood and 
his Church are delineated, in connection with, and by an equal analogy to, the priesthood 
and temple of the Hebrew Church, at the time, when that priesthood was reinstated in its 
functions, and that temple was rebuilt. As an example of this symbolical prediction, take 
Zech. vi. 10-15. The attempt of Archbishop Newcome to apply this prophecy to Zerubba- 
bel is in vain; for Zerubbabel wore no crown, neither was he a priest upon his throne. 

In the prophetic delineations of the future fortunes of the theocracy, in this book, the tem- 
porary and local relations of the present fall into the back-ground and the Messianic views 
predominate. In chapters ix.—xi., the struggle of the theocracy with the powers of the world 
is predicted, its victory and their subjection, by the appearing of the Messiah, and under 
his official authority as the Shepherd. In chapters xii.—xiv. the prophet predicts the last as- 
saults of the powers of the world upon Jerusalem; the conversion of Israel to the Messiah, 
whose death had been caused by the sin of the people; the ruin of the old theocracy, the 
annihilation of all the foes who fight against the Lord, and the final completion and glorifi- 
cation of the kingdom of God. 

In Haggai there are two Messianic prophecies (ii. 6, 7 and ii. 22, 23). The first promises 
the future glory of the second temple and the coming of the desire of all nations; the sec- 
ond predicts the exaltation of Zerubbabel, the offspring of David, and the overthrow of all 
earthly thrones. 

Malachi foretells the coming of the messenger of the covenant to the temple, and the 
sending of Elijah, the prophet, as his forerunner (Mal. iii. 1 and iv. 5). 

With Malachi terminates the prophecy of the Old Testament. His last predictions are 
like the earliest. They rebuke corruption and promise deliverance. They uphold the au 
thority of the first dispensation and reveal the second. 

A few words of recapitulation may contribute to the formation of a clearer view of the 
brief and imperfect survey of the scheme of prophecy, which has been exhibited. 

The survey shows that the character of prophecy is not simple and uniform, nor its light 
equable; and that it was dispensed in various degrees of revelation. It shows, moreover, 
that the principal age of prophecy is from Samuel to Malachi; that from the Fall to the 
Flood, and thence to the call of Abraham, its communications were few; that in the patri- 
archal age they were enlarged; that, during the bondage in Egypt, they were discontinued, 
but renewed with the Law; that a cessation of them, during four hundred years, followed 
the Law, and that a cessation of equal duration preceded the Gospel. 

It shows, further, that the subjects of prophecy varied. While it was all directed to one 
general design, in the evidence and support of religion, there was a diversity in the admin- 
istration of the Spirit, in respect to that design. In Paradise, it gave the first hope of a 
Redeemer After the Deluge, it established the peace of the natural world. In Abraham 
Ὁ founded the double covenant of Canaan and the Gospel. In the age of the Law, it spoke 
of the second prophet, and foreshadowed, in types, the doctrines of the Christian dispensa- 
‘ion. It foretold the future fate of the chosen people, who were placed under the preparae 


ὁ GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 


tory dispensation. In the time of David, it revealed, with the promise of the temporal, the 
xingdom of Christ. In the days of the later prophets, it foretold the changes of the Mosaic 
covenant, the fate of the chief pagan kingdoms, and completed the annunciation of the 
Messiah and his work of redemption. After the Captivity, it gave a last and more urgent 
information of the approaching advent of the Gospel. 

Thus prophecy ended as it had begun. Its first revelations in Paradise, and its concluding 
predictions, in the book of Malachi, are directed to the same point.!. That point is Christ. 
“To Him give all the prophets witness” (Acts x. 43). “The testimony of Jesuz is the 
spirit of prophecy ” (Rev. xix. 10). 


VI. 
Prophetic Styte. 


Each writer has a peculiar manner of expressing his thoughts, and this we call his style. 
The sacred writers form no exception : each one maintains his individuality. When we read 
Isaiah, we say this is not the style of Jeremiah, or of Ezekiel; and when we read John, 
we say this is not the style of Paul. 

The individuality of the sacred writers is beautifully illustrated by Gaussen, in his work 
Individual- on Inspiration.2, “ As a skillful musician,” says Mr. Gaussen, “ who has to exe- 
ity of style. Gute alone a long score, will avail himself by turns, of the funereal flute, the 
shepherd’s pipe, the dancer’s bagpipe, or the warrior’s trumpet; thus the Almighty God, to 
proclaim to us his eternal Word, has chosen of old the instruments into which He would suc- 
cessively breathe the breath of his Spirit. He chose them before the foundation of the 
world ; He separated them from their mother’s womb. 

“ Have you visited the Cathedral of Freyburg, and listened to that wonderful organist, 
who, with such enchantment, draws the tears from the traveller’s eyes; while he touches, one 
after another, his wonderful keys, and makes you hear by turns, the march of armies upon 
the beach, or the chanted prayer upon the lake during the tempest, or the voices of 
praise after it is calm? All your senses are overwhelmed, for it has all passed before you 
like a vivid reality. Well, thus the Eternal God, powerful in harmony, touches by turns 
with the fingers of his Spirit, the keys which He had chosen for the hour of his design, 
and for the unity of his celestial hymn. He had before Him, from eternity, all the human 
keys ; his creating eyes embraced at a glance, this key-board of sixty centuries; and when 
He would make this fallen world hear the eternal counsel of its redemption and the advent 
of the Son of God, He laid his left hand on Enoch, the seventh from Adam, and his right 
hand on John, the humble and sublime prisoner of Patmos. The celestial hymn, seven 
hundred years before the Deluge, began with these worgs: “ Behold, the Lord cometh with 
ten thousand of his saints, to judge the world;” but already in the thought of God and 
in the eternal harmony of his work, the voice of John was responding to that of Enoch, and 
terminating the hymn, three thousand years after him, with these words: ‘ Behold he cometh, 
and every eye shall see him, yea, those that pierced him! even so, Lord Jesus, come quickly, 
amen!’ And during this hymn of three thousand years, the Spirit of God did not cease 
to breathe upon all his ambassadors; the angels stooped, says an Apostle, to contemplate 
its depths; the elect of God were moved, and eternal life descended into their souls.” 

These ambassadors did not all speak, or write alike. “It was sometimes the sublime and 
untutored simplicity of John; sometimes the excited, elliptical, startling, argumentative 
energy of Paul; sometimes the fervor and solemnity of Peter; it was the majestic poetry 
of Isaiah, or the lyrical poetry of David; it was the simple and majestic narrative of Moses, 
or the sententious and royal wisdom of Solomon ; — yes, it was all that; it was Peter; it 
was Isaiah; it was Matthew; it was John; it was Moses; but it was God!” 

But apart from the style, which is the expression of the mental and moral idiosyn- 
Btyle peu. CTasies of the prophets, there is a style which characterizes them as prophets. 
liar tothe This arises from the method of prophetic revelation. With the exception of 
‘rophets 88 Moses and Christ, intercourse with heaven was maintained by means of vision 
Prophets. and dreams (Num. xii. 6). The distinction between these two, in genera: terms, 


1 Davison On Prophecy, pp. 258, 254. 
2 Theopneusty, or The Plenary Inspiration of the Holy Scriptxres. By 8. R. L. Gaussev, pp. 64, 65,66 Sew York 
@aker & Scribner, 1846. 


GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 97 


seems to be this: the vision referred to what was seen; the dream, to what was spoken and 
heard. The prophets, while retaining their consciousness a:d the use of their rational pow 
ers, were raised to a spiritual sphere, where they saw the vision and heard the words of the 
Almighty. Such seems to be the meaning of the phrases, “I was in the Spirit and heard”; 
«The hand of the Lord was upon me”; ‘ The Spirit of the Lord came upon me.” When 
in this condition their intellectual and emotional nature was quickened. They knew by 
intuition, and their hearts glowed with seraphic ardor. This was “the normal state of the 
prophets, when they were receiving divine communications.” They were in “the region ol 
spirit as contradistinguished from that of sense and time.” At the same time they retained 
their personal characteristics and native susceptibilities. The Holy Spirit, both “in his 
more peculiar, and in his more common operations upon the soul, has respect to its essential 
powers and properties, and adapts himself in his most special communications, not only to 
the general laws of thought, which regulate the workings of the human mind, but also to 
the various idiosyncrasies and acquired habits of particular individuals.” While this is 
true, it is plain that communications made to men, who were elevated to the spiritual sphere, 
cannot have the form and dress of outward reality. They are to be separated from the 
things of actual life, and confined to the region, in which they were made. Bearing this in 
mind, we will be freed from the necessity of understanding literally the instructions given to 
Hosea to marry an unchaste woman, and the command to Ezekiel to lie three hundred and 
ninety days at a stretch on one side, and forty days upon the other (Ezek. iv. 5, 6), together 
with symbolical actions of a similar kind. Such typical actions were ideal and intended to 
present an image of the actual world in the territory of real life. Dr. Fairbairn justly 
remarks, that such things, “ understood to be representative, and teaching actions in the 
purely spiritual sphere, could not, by anything of an unbecoming nature, which they might 
contain, “ produce the pernicious effect which must have attended them, had they obtruded 
themselves upon the senses ; they were for the mind alone to contemplate, and it would natu- 
rally do so with a respect to the moral bearing of the representation.” The principle of 
interpretation of such typical representations is, therefore, in the words of Dr. Fairbairn, 
the following: “ As, according to the rule, divine communications were to be made to the 
prophets in ecstasy or vision, so whenever we have to do merely with the record of these 
communications, the actions related, as well as the things seen and heard, should be under- 
stood to have occurred in the spiritual sphere of prophetic revelation ; and outward reality 
is to be predicated of any them, only when the account given is such as to place the 
symbolical act in undoubted connection with the facts of history. Or it may be put thus: 
The actions are to be held as having taken place in the spiritual sphere alone, if they occur 
simply in the account of God’s communications to the prophet; but in actual life, if they 
are found in the narration of the prophet’s dealings with the people. In the one case the 
mere publication of the account constituted the message from God; while in the other, an 
embodied representation was given of it in the outward act.” 

The depth, sublimity, and force of the prophetical writings cannot be fully comprehended 
without an acquaintance with the symbols employed in them. A knowledge of ον προ ῖοαὶ 
these symbols furnishes a key to many of the prophecies, whose treasures can style of the 
only be discovered by him, who knows how to use it. Many works have been Prophets. 


᾿ - . . 7 Symbols 
written on symbology ; but perhaps much still remains in that field to reward the See 
patient investigator. natural 


There was a natural tendency in the prophets to adopt figurative representa- ere 


tions of future things. The various objects of the world of nature were used for this pur- 
pose. These natural objects, known and familiar to all, were used as images of things bear- 
ing some resemblance to them in the history of God’s kingdom among men. ‘They were 
used, however, in their broader and more common aspects, not in a recondite sense known 
only to a few. They were applied, moreover, in a consistent and uniform manner. The 
prophets did not shift from the symbolical to the literal, without any apparent indication of 
change, nor from one aspect of the symbolical to another essentially different. 

“The Law,” on the authority of an Apostle, “ was a shadow of good things to come, and 
Ἰοῦ the very image of the things” (Heb. χ. 1). Tt had the “shadow of heav- he nistory 
enly things ” (Heb, viii. 5). “ Which are a shadow of things to come; but the of the Old 
pody is of Christ ” (Col. ii. 17). These passages teach that the institutions of Voy’ 


under whic 
‘the Old Covenant stood in a typical relation to the institutions of the New. the prophex 


38 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 


dved, fur- When the prophets, therefore, announced the better things to come, they repre. 
ches sented them as a fuller development of the things existing under the Old Cove- 
of symboli- Nant, or as a grander exemplification of the truths and principles which they 
ealand typi- embodied. Much of their imagery too was drawn from their more sensuous 
it aa system of worship. This is a combination of type with prophecy, which is very 

natural; for as every type possesses a prophetical element, we may expect them 
sometimes to run into each other. In this way the typical in the past, or present, is repre- 
sented, by a distinct prophetical announcement, as going to appear again in the future. For 
example, Hosea (viii. 13), speaking of the Lord’s purpose to visit the sins of Israel with 
chastisement, says, “ They shall return to Egypt.’ The old state of things should come 
back upon them, or the evil, which was to befall them, was to be after the type of what their 
forefathers had experienced under the yoke of Pharoah. Yet the new was not to be the 
exact repetition of the old; for, in the next chapter (ix. 3), the prophet says, “ Ephraim 
shall return to Egypt, and they shall eat unclean things in Assyria”; and again (chapter 
xi. 5), “He shall not return into the land of Egypt, but the Assyrian shall be his king.” 
“ He shall return to Egypt,” and he shall not return to Egypt; in other words the Egyptian 
state shall come upon him. 

This mode of representation is not peculiar to the prophets. We find examples of it in 
the classics. The Sibyl, in Virgil, when disclosing to Auneas the fortunes of himself and 
of his posterity in Latium, represents them as a repetition of what he had experienced in 
Troy. 

“ Non Simois tibi, nee Xanthus, nec Dorica Castra 
Defuerint: alius Latio jam partus Achilles, 
Natus et ipse Dea.’’ 


We have already remarked that the prophets, when they saw their visions, were trans- 


Poetical ported into an ecstatic state, and rendered capable of holding direct intercourse 
style of the with heaven. 
prophets. 


They ‘ pass’d the flaming bounds of space and time: 
The living-throne, the sapphire-blaze, 

Where angels tremble, while they gaze,” 

They ‘ saw.” 

In such an elevated spiritual and mental condition, the language of poetry became the 
natural vehicle of their glowing thoughts and figurative representations. The poetical diction 
of the prophets is, therefore, connected with their prophetical state. The ecstatical state 
was the source of the poetical element in prophecy. 

Among the Hebrews and some other nations of antiquity, there was but one word for 
prophet and poet. It was thought that every prophet must be a poet, and every poet to 
some extent a prophet. Hence it arose that the prophetical gift was measured by the poeti- 
cal, and the prophetical books were assigned to a golden, or a silver age, according to their 
rank as poetical compositions. But prophets and poets have distinct spheres, and different 
ends in view. “ The distinctive characteristic of the prophetical representation lies pecul 
iarly in this, that it is not confined to any precise mode ; but as its aim rises above all kinds 
of human discourse, so it avails itself of all, according as they are best adapted to that aim. 
The poct has his definite manner, and cannot so readily change and vary it, for his imme- 
diate aim is not to work upon others; he must satisfy himself and the requirements of his 
own art. But the prophet will and must work upon others; nay work upon them in the 
most direct and impressive manner; and so for him every method and form of representa- 
ion is right which carries him straightest to his end.” ὅ 

The poetical element in prophecy was regulated by a practical aim. Hence we find in 
the prophetical writings the simplest narratives, the most practical addresses, and poetical 
descriptions in close juxtaposition. All was made subservient to the higher ends of spiritual 
instruction. 

In addition to Prophetic Poetry, Hebrew Literature has two other kinds — Lyric and 
Didactic. The Lyric Poetry of the Bible consists chiefly of the effusions of pious feelings, 
and forms the greater portion of the Psalms. The Hebrew Didactic Poetry is mostly com- 
prised in the book of Proverbs. The Prophetic Poetry abounds more than these in meta- 
phors, allegories, comparisons, and copious descriptions. It excels also in imagination and is 


mergy of diction. 
i Anes, lib. vi. 88-90. 2 Gray’s Progress of Poesy. 
’ Ewald ; quoted by Dr. Fairbairn, On Prophecy, p. 134. 


GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 39 


The characteristic form of Hebrew Poetry is parallelism, which is divided into (1) 
Synonymous, in which the second line is entirely or almost a repetition of the first ; (2) 
Antithetic, in which the second line is the converse of the first; (3) Synthetic, in which the 
idea contained in the first line is further developed in the second. 

The observance of this parallelism in the interpretation of the prophetical and poetical 
books of Scripture will preserve the interpreter from errors, into which he might otherwise 
fall. 


VIE 
Schools of Prophetical Interpretation. 


The symbolical character of prophecy opens an ample field for the indulgence of fancy 
and imagination ; and some interpreters seem to look upon it as a gymnasium for the exer- 
cise of the imaginative faculty. They see things that the prophets never saw. They speak 
with as much assurance as if they knew not only the grand scheme of divine Providence, 
but also every part of its machinery. The rings, which Ezekiel saw, and which “ were 
so high that they were dreadful, inspire no dread in the minds of such interpreters, but 
appear to them in their mathematical dimensions of hubs, spokes, fellies, and tire. The 
“terrible crystal” does not dazzle their eyes. Like Dante they describe with the accu- 
racy οἵ eye-witnesses and ear-witnesses. Prophecy to them is merely history written before- 
hand; and consequently all that it reveals of the future must be as literal as history 
itself. 

Others go to the opposite extreme. They change the nature of prophecy, by denying 
that its object was to give any precise, or definite outline of the future, and regard it as the 
expression of men’s fears or longings, as to the coming destinies of the world. 

There are others, who rob prophecy altogether of its predictive character. It contains, 
according to their view, nothing that lies beyond the reach of human foresight. The 
precise and definite knowledge of the future, implying as it does a miracle, is, in their 
opinion, impossible. 

The fundamental principle of literalism is that “ Prophecy is nothing but the history 
of events before they come to pass.” It is history anticipated, and all that it ‘The literal- 
reveals of the future must be taken as literally as history itself. The great argu- ists- 
ment in behalf of this view is the exact fulfillment of many prophecies — especially of 
prophecies relating to the advent and history of Christ. Even here the principle fails ; for 
Christ did not sit literally upon “the throne of his father David.” The valleys were not 
literally exalted, nor were the mountains and hills literally made low (Is. xl. 4) before Him. 
It was this extreme literalism on the part of the Jewish interpreters that led to his cruci- 
fixion. It lay at the foundation of the worldly views of his disciples (Matt. xviii. 1; Mark 
ix. 34; Luke ix. 46; Acts i. 6). 

Tested by the principle of this school, the first prophecy (Gen. iii. 15) would be denuded 
of all serious import, did it literally mean that the descendants of Eve, on the one side, 
would receive injuries from serpents, and that, on the other, serpents would have their heads 
crushed by them. Certainly something more was intended to comfort our first parents, when 
driven from Paradise and mourning under the curse induced by their fall. 

The prophets did not expect to be understood literally, when they spoke of the future 
glory of the Church as consisting in the complete reéstablishment of the old economy, the 
erection of the temple, the enforcement of its ritual, and the concourse of all nations to its 
ourts ; for in other places they speak of a new covenant, of the abrogation of the old one 
as not worthy to be remembered. It must require a great stretch of credulity to adopt the 
literal interpretation of the concluding chapters of Ezekiel. His rebuilt temple takes, in 
the Apocalypse, the form of a holy city with “no temple therein.” So also many things 
that are said of Zion and Jerusalem cannot be taken in a literal sense ; for the language, 
while referring to the present dispensation, takes its coloring from the Old Economy, which 
was to vanish away. ‘Take the last prophecy of the Old Testament (Mal. iv. 5); can any 
916 adopt its literal interpretation, unless Elijah is yet to come ? 

It cannot be doubted that numerous and exact correspondences between the prophetis 


40 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 


delineations of Scripture and the past and present state of the world can be pointed out 
and that the language of prophecy has, in many instances, been literally verified by the facta 
of history. Hence the popularity of those works, which have been written to show these 
correspondences and exact fulfillments. They have contributed to awaken a lively interest 
in the subject of prophecy, and have furnished an argument for the truth of the Bible, by 
directing attention to certain predictions, whose accomplishment cannot be denied. “ But it 
is perfectly possible that the efforts in this direction may have somewhat overshot the proper 
mark; that the advantage obtained on one side may have been pushed so far as to create a 
disadvantage on another; that the evidence of a close and literal fulfillment of particular 
prophecies, by being carried beyond its due limits, may have given rise to views and expecta- 
tions respecting the structure and design of prophecy in general, which are neither warrant- 
able in themselves nor capable of being vindicated by a reference to historical results. Such 
indeed has proved to be the case.” ' 

One extreme begets another. Some minds are so constituted that they cannot occupy a 
middle ground. When they see the untenableness of one position, they choose 
the very opposite. It is with something of this disposition that a class of inter- 
preters, convinced of the falsity of the principle that prophecy is history written 
beforehand, hold that very little, if any, is so written. ‘They say, if prophecy is history 
written beforehand, it should be written as history. Instead of giving any precise, or defi- 
nite outline of the future, it is regarded by them as the expression of men’s fears and long- 
ings in regard to the future destinies of the world. Dr. Arnold has said: “If you put, as 
you may do, Christ for abstract good and Satan for abstract evil, I do not think that the 
notion is so startling, that they are the main and only proper subjects of prophecy, and that in 
all other cases the language is, in some part or other, hyperbolical; hyperbolical, I mean, 
and not merely figurative. Nor can I conceive how, on any other supposition, the repeated 
applications of the Old Testament language to our Lord, not only by others, but by himself, 
can be understood to be other than arbitrary.” 

This school of interpretation occupies less tenable ground than the literalists ; for it elimi- 
nates from prophecy everything that is properly predictive. Hence there is no revelation 
from God to his people, in regard to the future movements of his providence in the world. 
Prophecy is nothing more than an expression of men’s fears and longings. We would say 
it is rather a response from God to these fears and longings, to sustain the hope of his people 
in times of darkness, and to inspire confidence in the goodness and rectitude of his mora! 
administration. 

It is difficult to conceive how anticipations, fears, and longings could take so definite a 
form, and so detailed a character as many portions of the prophetical writings exhibit. 
Unexpected events, and the names of the persons who accomplished them, are foretold. 
The prophecies relating to Nineveh and Babylon delineate so circumstantially what befell 
those cities, as to exclude them from the sphere of mere anticipation, or human foresight. 
Dates, names, and particulars of the minutest kind belong to certain foreknowledge, not to 
anticipations, longings, and fears. 

The fundamental principle of the neological school is that there cannot be distinct prophetic 
Soresight of the distant future. Distinct foresight of the distant future would be 
a miracle of knowledge, and there can be no such thing as a miracle. “ The 
writings of the prophets,” says a representative of this school, “ contain nothing above the 
reach of the human faculties. Here are noble and spirit-stirring appeals to men’s conscience, 
patriotism, honor, and religion; beautiful poetic descriptions, odes, hymns, expressions of 
faith almost beyond praise. But the mark of human infirmity is on them all, and proofs or 
signs of miraculous inspiration are not found in them. 

The effects of such a principle upon the interpretation of the prophetical writings can be 
easily seen. All predictions of the future are, according to these neological interpreters, 
vaticinia ex eventu; or they relate to things which might have been easily foreseen without 
a special revelation. To this foregone conclusion all exegetical results must yield or be 
accommodated. Hence the arbitrary processes of the destructive criticism employed for the 
discovery of arguments, philological, historical, rhetorical, and moral against the genuine- 
ness of many passages in the prophets. It is necessary to refer only to the treatment by 
neologists of the later prophecies of Isaiah and the book of Daniel as exemplifications. Oi 
yourse “all conclusions fouided, or necessarily depending, on the false assumption ” of this 


Anti-literal- 
ists. 


Neologists. 


GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 4] 


school of interpreters, ‘ must,” in the words of Dr. Alexander, “ go for notking with those 
who do not hold it, and especially with those who are convinced that it is false.’ That it 
is false every interpreter, who receives the doctrine of the inspiration of the Scriptures, 
believes. 

It is admitted that there is a historical element in prophecy. So far from standing in iso- 
_ation, prophecy is interwoven with sacred history. The latter is its frame-work. é 
In the facts of history prophetical revelations take their rise and form. But it ia 
does not follow from this that one is the measure of the other. History is the ἢ 
occasion of prophecy ; but the latter rises above the former and sheds a supernatural light 
upon its movements. Prophecy is the antedated history of a divine agency in the affairs of 
the world, an agency now veiled in clouds and moving unseen, now revealing itself in daz- 
zling brightness. This providential history dictated by One, who is not subject to the limi. 
tations of space and time, pays very little regard, in many instances, to these necessary con- 
ditions of all human agency. A thousand years in the sight of God are as a moment. His 
prophet looking down the vista of time saw visions of the future as we see the stars in the 
firmament. The stars seem near to each other; but they are separated by billions of miles. 
So future events seemed near to each other, in the visions of the prophet, but in reality they 
are sometimes separated by millenniums. As an illustration of this it is sufficient to refer’ to 
the prophecies of Zephaniah and the twenty-fourth chapter of Matthew, in which our 
Saviour foretells the destruction of Jerusalem, and, in close connection with it, the signs of 
the day of judgment. 

It is, moreover, well to bear in mind that the fulfillment of many prophecies is germinant. 
In other words they are fulfilled by installments, each installment being a pledge of that 
which is to follow. Such a prophecy is that of Joel (ii. 28, 29) concerning the outpouring 
of the Holy Spirit. It was not completely fulfilled on the day of Pentecost. It is going on 
fulfilling at the present time. Of course to make history the measure of such prophecies is 
impossible until the whole course of both history and prophecy is run. 

Again, the combination of type with prophecy renders it necessary to distinguish between 
prophetical representations and direct historical narrative. Taking this combination into con- 
sideration, it is impossible to interpret many prophecies as anticipated history in a literal sense. 
“ Every type was so far a prophecy, that under the form of sensible things, and by means of 
present outward relations, it gave promise of other things yet to come, corresponding in 
design, but higher and better in kind. And hence, when a prophetic word accompanied the 
type, or pointed to the things which it prefigured, it naturally foretold the antitypical under 
the aspect, or even by the name of the typical.” This relation of the typical to the anti- 
typical furnishes the key to the interpretation of many of the prophecies relating to Christ 
and the future glories of the Church. In these prophecies it is scarcely possible to under- 
stand David, Zion, and Jerusalem, as the David, Zion, and Jerusalem of the Old Testament, 
or to understand the things predicted of them as a literal reproduction of the things of the 
Jewish Economy. ‘They evidently refer to things in the sphere of the antitype, prefigured 
in the sphere of the type; and these things differ as much from the things that prefigured 
them, as the antitype differs from the type. Material types of spiritual objects do not imply 
a material fulfillment. 

It is not denied, in what has been said, that many announcements of prophecy are capable 
of yielding clear and specific historical resuits, that they have heen lterally fulfilled; but 
merely that prophecy is written like history, and that one is the measure of the other. There 
is a palpable reason why prophecy should not be written like history, lest the clearness of 
its predictions should prompt the efforts that lead to their accomplishment. In fact it has 
been alleged that such is the case, in regard to some prophecies written in a style closely 
approximating that of historical narrative. “The best form for the purposes of argument,” 
says Dr. Chalmers, “in which a prophecy can be delivered, is to be so obscure as to leave 
he event, or rather its main circumstances, unintelligible before the fulfillment, and so clear’ 
as to be intelligible after it.” Kven in reference to some of the most historical parts of the 
visions of Daniel, Hengstenberg has remarked, that no one ignorant of the history, and with 
only this prophetical outline in his hand, could make his way to any precise and circumstan- 
tial account of the events.’ 

1 See Fairbairn, On Prophecy, p. 114. 


42 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 


VI. 
Canon of the Prophetical Predictive Books. 


The Jews made two classes of prophetical books, one of which may be denominated 
Divisions of LTophetical historical books ; and the other, prophetical predictive books. The first 
the prophet- Class contains Joshua, Judges, 1 and 2 Samuel, and 1 and 2 Kings, which they 
deal books. _ styled the earlier prophets [Ὡ πη ὩΣΝΝ 321]; the second class, the prophets 
proper, called by them the later prophets [Θ᾿ ΠΝ O22]. The latter are subdivided 
into the greater prophets [τ Ὁ N}33], namely, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel; and the 


lesser [3 Ὁ) OSI], namely, in the order of our authorized version, Hosea, Joel, Amos, 
Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi 
These form twelve separate books in our Bibles; but they were reckoned one by the Jews, 
who regulated the number of the books in the Hebrew Scriptures by that of the Hebrew 
alphabet, which consists of twenty-two letters. 

,The book of Daniel stands, in the Hebrew Canon, among the Kethubim, between Esther 
Collocation and Ezra; in the LXX. and Vulgate, in the German and English Versions, it is 
of the book placed after Ezekiel, as the fourth of the greater prophets. Its position in the 
of Daniel. ‘Hebrew Canon seems, at first sight, remarkable. But it is supposed to be a 
natural consequence of the right apprehension of the different functions of the prophet and 
Reason of 8661. Daniel had the spirit, but not the work of a prophet; and as his work 
this collocae was a new one, so was it carried out in a style of which the Old Testament offers 
ΟΡ: no other example. His Apocalypse is as distinct from the prophetic writings as 
the Apocalypse of St. John from the apostolic epistles. The heathen court is to one seer 
what the isle of Patmos is to the other, a place of exile and isolation, where he stands alone 
with his God, and is not, like the prophets, active in the midst of a struggling nation.! 

All these books were received into the Hebrew Canon as possessing divine authority, 
Formation 2nd they are found in all the ancient catalogues. Ezra, according to tradition, 
of the He- collected and arranged all the sacred books, τὴν were admitted to be inspired, 
brew Canon. Hrevious to his time; and the work was continued by the Great Synagogue, 
until the Canon was closed by the admission of the book of Malachi, the last of the Hebrew 
prophets. 

The following table is copied, with some changes, from that of Otto Schmoller, the author 
Chronologi- of the Commentaries upon Hosea, voel, and Amos. Other dates, in some cases, 
eee are assigned by different Commentators, whose arguments, in support of them, 
prophetical can be found in the special Introductions to the several books. They are al’ 
BOOKS. briefly exhibited in O. R. Hertwig’s tables for an Introduction to the Canonica 
and Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament : — 


1. Tor Pre-AsSYRIAN PERIOD. 


Prophets. dings of Juduh. Kings of Israel. 
B. C. B. C. 
Obadiah, c. 890-880? [585] 896 9 Joram. 
5 Joram, 889 
6 Ahaziah, 884 
7 (Athaliah) 883 10 Jehu. 
8 Jehoash, 877 
Joel, c. 850. 856 11 Jehoahaz. 
840 12 Jehoash. 
9 Amaziah, 838 
Jonah, c. 825-790. 824 18 Jeroboam II 
Amos, c. 810-783 10 Azariah, 810 
Hosea, c. 790-725? [called 783 Anarchy. 
Uzziah 2 Kings xv. 18 and 2 Chron. xxvi. 1] 772 14 Zachariah 


7111 15 Shallum. 
1 Auberlen, On Daniel and Revelation, pp. 25, 26; and Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, 8s. ¥ Danie 


Prophets. 


Isaiah, 
Micah, 


Nahum, 


᾿ Zephaniah, 


Jeremiah, 
Habakkuk, 
Ezekiel, 


B. C. 
c. 760-690. 


9. 758-710. 


6. 680. 


c. 639-609. 


c. 628-583. 
c. 608-590. 
c. 594-535. 


GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 485 


2. ASSYRIAN PERIOD. 


Destruction of the kingdom of Judah by the Chaldeans, 588 


Prophets. 


Haggai, 
Zechariah, 


Malachi, 


B. C. 
ο. 520-525. 
c. 520-510. 


c. 438-424. 


Kings of Judah. Kings of Israel. 
Bac 
16 Menahem. 
760 17 Pekahiah. 
759 18 Pekah. 
11 Jotham, 758 
12 Ahaz, 742 
730 19 Hoshea. 
18 Hezekiah, 727 
722 Overthrow of the King 
dom of Israel by the 
14 Manasseh, 696 Assyrians. 
15 Amon, 641 
8. CHALDAN PERIOD. 
16 Josiah, 639 
17 Jehoahaz, 609 
18 Jehoiakim, 608 
19 Jehoiachin, 599 
20 Zedekiah, 598 
4, PERIOD OF THE EXILE. 
B. C. 
588-c. 536. 
Jeremiah, c. 628-583. 
Ezekiel, c. 594-535. 
Daniel, c. 605-536. 
5. Post-EXxILE PERIOD. 
Kings of Persia. 
Β. Ο. 
Cyrus, 529 
Darius Hystaspis, 521-486. 


Artaxerxes Longimanus, 433-494 


GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 


‘OR Tyee 
91 1948 “qerreq007, 
qepne ‘yeaseq 
889-002 “qerueqdez, 
‘qepne jo ‘qn qyrqey 
wopsury Somyen 
‘wel Tou eM 
yepne jo ‘qerpeqo 
wopzZury τ ΤΟΣ 
*sOuly 

ἸΘΌΙΒῚ Jo 
“ἜΘΒΟῊ 

wmopsury 
Sqeuor 

“smopZury 


OM} 01} 0} ΠΟΙΌΪΘΙ Ijoq} Uy 


ee eee ᾿ Ἀ4Ἀ6ᾳὈ6β.ῬὈιοὀᾳτ-ς--“ςσσσσσι|ιιΤςφἘἨς,»ςς,,ἨἨ.ξ 6Π΄φ ΄᾿-᾿-᾿-᾿-Θ--ῤ-- 


(ἀπϑαοη ‘x1exej.1y) 
ὍΟΥ 8ὉΡ 

(᾿ϑι45 Ὁ) 5 ΛῊ βπιαθ4) 
1618 τποα ᾷ 


(᾿ΒιἀΒ 51 ΒΗ ΜΈΓ Jo αὐϑά puooes oy} τ) 


619 


(πθιθορ) 
Ὅσ9-0 9 


(᾿πθιβορ 10 “πθεθθπΒ 7) 


“169-099 


(θα s,yeryozeH JO ΠΌΠ PZ) 


“669-014 


(‘qeryezey ‘zeqy ‘ureqgor) 
“001-892 


(᾿ ΠΒΙΣΘΖΘΗ [HUN Yeizzy pure “TT 4019) 


“GSL-061 
(πθίζζῃ pue ἽΤ ‘qozer) 
“8-018 
(II -qozep) 
881 708 
(-yseor) 
“888-188 
(-urer10f) 
Ὃ “ad ¥8-688 


“spolleg 
TeorZojouoi1gyH epoodg 


ΠΟΌΙΒΡΙ 
᾿πθμθηοοζ 


ἜΦΘΗ 


“qeraeydez 


ΣΕΣΣΒΑΌΗ 


"ἜΘΒΟΗ 


“ΒΟΙΠΥ͂ 


*ysuor 


Ἴ9ΟΡ 


WBIpEqo 


ἼΣ 


0} δα!φριοοον 


068 


Ὃ 8 008 


“spolleg 


[eo1Zojou0149 


[eroedg 


“‘Tqoeley 


“qerreyoe7, 


"1e33eH 


“qerpeqo 


ΠΣΣΒΑΌΗ 


*qerueyde7 


ἽΠΗΠΈΝ 


“WR 


“e280 


*sOULy 


*qeuor 


ἼΘΟΡ 


‘MOM 96 


0} ϑατιράοοῦν 


[Ὃς HOvVd ΘΕ ἼΕΥ, S,DIMLUGA Ἢ ὋὉ] 


SLOUHdOUd WONT 


Ῥομθα 


ΘΙΓΧΘ- 50 


“poreg 


uvespleypD 


Ῥομοα 


us {ssy 


ἜΡΟΜΘΩ 
Teo1Zojou014H 
τθαθαθἢ) 


1 
ὙΠΟΌΙΒΙΙ | GL 


“THoee 
qeLeyoe7 “yerreyoey | IT 
"yesauy] ὙΒΩΖΘΗ | OL 
“‘qeiaeydez ᾿ποιαυηᾶο | 6 
“yoyyeqey “ynyytqeH | 8 
ἽΠΏΠΌΝ ἽἹΠΏΠΕΝ | 2 
“yeuor qeory | 9 
“yeipeqo “yeuor | g 
“Poor “qeipeqdo | F 
qeory ‘souy | 8 
ΒΟΌΣ ἼΘΟΡ | & 
“eosOH] ὍΘΒΟΗ | T 

“9x0, 
ΧΧΊ 98} 037 
ϑαιριοοοῦ ἈΘΧΟΘΗΣ OT 


0} Zuypioo0y 


GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 45 


IX. 
Literature of the Greater Prophets. 
See the Literature in the respective Introductions to these Prophets. 
General Literature of the Minor Prophets. 


The Monographic Literature is found at the end of the Introductions to the severa. 
books. In order to restore a chronological arrangement in the enumeration of the interpre- 
ters, I have, where I was able, specified the editio princeps of the work in question, and 
added the year of the author’s death. 


I, EXEGESIS. 
Primitive Church Exegesis. 


HizRONYMUS (tf 420): Comm. in Proph. Minores ; in the Frankfort-Leipzig folio edition 
of 1684 ff. Vol. vi., p. 91 ff. 

THEODORE OF MopsuxsTIA (1 429): Comm. in Proph. Minores; ed. Th. a Wegnern. 
Berol. 1834. 

CyriLLus ALEXANDRINUS ({ 444): Comm. in Prophetas Minores Grace et Lat., ed. J. 
Pontanus. Ingolst. 1607. Folio. 

THEODORETUS CYRENSIS ({ 457) : Explanatio in XII. Proph. quos Minores vocant juxta 
interpr. LXX. P. Gillio interprete. Lugd. 1533. (In the folio edition of his works, vol. 
ii., p. 1449 ff.) 


Medieval Exegesis. 


Haymo ({ 853): Comm. in XII. Proph. Minn. Col. 1533. Folio. 

Remicius ANTISSIDORENSIS (c. 900): Comm. in Proph. Min. in the Bibl. Max. Patrum, 
t. xvi. p. 928 ff. 

THEOPHYLACT (ft after 1071): Comm. in (5) Min. Proph. Lat. ex interpr. J. Loniceri. 
Francof. 1534. Folio. 

Rupertus ΤΟΙΤΙΕΝΒΙΒ ({ 1135): Comm. in Prophetas Minores, in Opp. Par. 1638. 
Folio. Vol. i., p. 798 ff. 

Hueco ΡῈ S. Caro ({ 1263): Postille s. Breves Comm. in Proph. Min. in Univv. Biblia 
juzta quadruplicem sensum. Col. 1621. Folio. 

ALBERTUS Maenus (f 1280): Comm. in Proph. Min. Opp. Lugd. 1051. T. viii. 

Nicotaus ΡῈ Lyra (+ 1340): Postille Perpetue, ed. Feuardent, Dadrzeus, and others. 
Lugd. and Par. 1590. Folio. 

CoRNELIUS A LAPIDE (1 1637): Commentarii. Antv. 1664. Folio 


Rabbinical Commentaries. 


R. Satomon BEN Isaak (Jarchi, Izchaki, Raschi, ¢ 1105): Comm. in Proph. Lat., ed. 
F. Breithaupt. Gotha. 1713. 4to. 

R. ABRAHAM BEN ΜΕΙΒ IBN Esra (Abenezra, ¢ 1167). (See under Bomberg’s Rab- 
nical Bible.) 

R. Ὁ. Κιμσηι (1 1230): XII. Proph. Minn. cum Comment. Ὁ. Kimchi a F. Vatablo 
emend. Par. 1539. 4to. 

5. J. Norzi: sw ΓΙ, Kritischer Commentar zum A. T. (1626), in the Vienna edition 
of the Old Testament, by Ge. Holzinger, 1812 sq. 

R. Lipman: Disputatio adv. Christianos ad Explanationem XII. Prophetarum Minn. in- 
rtvuta. Alt. 1644, 

Bomsere’s Rabb. Bibel. (Ven. 1518. Folio.) [Bomberg’s Rabbinical Bible. This con- 


46 GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 


tains the Targum of Jonathan and the Commentary of David Kimchi. The second edition, 
by Jacob Ben Chayim (Ven. 1526), has the two Masoras and the Commentary of Aben- 
ezra]. 

Buxtorr’s Rabb. Bibel (Bas. 1618). [Buxtorf’s Rabbinical B’ble (Basle, 1618), con- 
tains, besides the Targum, the Commentaries of Raschi, Aberezra, Kimchi, Levi Ben Ger- 
som, and others. ! 


Exegesis at ihe Period of the Reformation. 


Franc. LAMBERT ({ 1530): Comm. in Proph. Minn. Compiled. Francf. 1579. 

Jo. OEcOLAMPADIUS ({ 1531): Adnott.in P. M. Compiled. Gen. 1558. Folio. 

Cour. Petiicanus: Comm. in ll. VY. T. Tig. 1532. F. V. IV. (All the proph: 
ets except Jonah and Zechariah.) 

Mart. LuTuHer’s Auslegungen der Propheten. Halle. 1741. Th. vi. [Mart. Luther’ 
Expositions of the Prophets, in the Quarto Edition of Walch. Halle. 1741. Part vi.] 

Vict. STRIGEL, Scholia in Proph. Minores. Lips. 1561. 

Jo. Carvin: Prelectiones in Proph. Minores. Opp. Amst. 1671. T. V. 2. 

Jou. WiGcAnpD: Explicationes in Duodecim Proph. Min. Francof. 1566. 

Jo. Mercerus ({ 1570): Comm. in Proph. 5 inter eos qui Minn. vocantur, cum Pref. 
Chevaleriit. Gen. 1698. 4to. 

Luc. OstanDER: Biblia juxta Vet. seu Vulg. transl., ete. (ed. pr. Tub. 1573). Tub. 
1097: 1. a: 

Jo. Brentius (1 1578): Comm. in Hos., Am., Jon. Micah. Opp. Tub. 1578. Folio. 
Dave 

J. TREMELLIUS ET JuNIUS: Biblia Sacra s.l. Can. V. T. Latini recens ex Hebreo facts 
brevibusque Scholii illustrati. Francf.ad M. 1579. Folio. ΤΙ iv. 

Lams. Danzus: Comm. in Proph. 12 Minn. Gen. 1586. 

Nic. SELNECCER (1 1592) : Anmerkungen zu den Proph. Hosea, Joel, Micah. Lpz. +578. 
to. Auslegung tiber Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk. Lpz. 1567. 4to. Ueber Jeremiah und 
Zephanjah. Lpz. 1566. 4to. [Annotations on the prophets Hosea, Joel, Micah. Leipzig, 
1578, 4to. Exposition of Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk. Leipzig, 1567, 4to. Jeremiah and 
Zephaniah. Leipzig, 1566, 4to. | 


Post-Reformation Exegesis. 


Franc. Risera (Rom. Cath.): Comm.in 12 P.M. Rom. 1593. 4to. 

Jo. Drustus ({ 16.6): Comm. in 12 Proph. Minores, ed. J. Amama. Amst. 1627. 4to. 

Caspr. Sanctrus (Rom. Cath.): Comm. in P.M. Lugd. 1621. Folio. 

Jou. PiscaTor (t 1625) : Comm. in Cann. ll. V.T. Herb. 1646. Folio. 

Jo. TARNOVIUS (1 1629) : Comm. in Pr. M.c. pref. J.B. Carpzovii. Lips. 1688. 4to. 

J. H. Menocurus (Rom. Cath.) : Brevis expos. lit. sensus totius Scr. S. ex opt. autt. coll. 
Coll. 1680. T. ii. 

Lup. pE Dinu (1642): Critica Sacra. Amst. 1698. Folio. 

H. Grortius (+ 1645): Annotata ad V.T. Par. 1644. Folio. T. ii. 

Jo. Coccrrus: Comm. in Proph. Minn. Lugd. B. 1652. Folio. 

J. Trapp: Exposition upon the 12 M. P. Lond. 1654. 

Jou. Hurcurson: Explicatio in 12 P.M. Lond. 1657. Folio. 

Criticr Sacrt: S. Doctissimorum Virorum ad Sacra Biblia annott. et tractatus. Lond. 
1660. Folio. T. iv. Sp. 6583 ff. (With the Commentaries of Munster, Vatablus, Castalio, 
Clarius, Drusius, Liveleias, Grotius.) 

J. pE LA Haye (Rom. Cath.) : Biblia Maxima. Par. 1660 ff. Folio. (With the Comm 
of Estius, Sa, Menochius, Tirinus.) 

Apr. Catovius: Biblia Iilustrata, ete. (ed. pr. 1077). Dresd. 1729. Folio. T.i. 

Jou. Scumip: Comm. in Proph. Minn. Lips. 1687 ff., cum pref. Seb. Schmid. 

Ses. Scumip ({ 1696): Comm. in P. M. Lips. 1698. to. 

Jo. Marcxrus: Comm. in Jo. Am. 03. Jon. Amstelod. 1698. 4to. In Micah, Nah 
Hab., Zeph. Amst. 1700. Ato. : 

A. Catmer (Rom. Cath.) : Commentaire Literal sur tous les Livres de VAncien οἱ du 
Nouveau Tastament (ed. pr. Par. 1707). Par. 1725. Folio. 


GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 47 


Totyc. Lysrerus: Prelectiones acadd. in P. M. Goslar. 1709. Ato. 

J. H. Micnaeuis: Biblia Hebraciacum Annott. Hal. 1720. (Obadiah and Micah, by Ch. 
Ben. Michaelis.) ' 

Η. Β. Starck: Nole Selecte in Proph. Lips. 1728. 4to. 

J. W. Perersen: Erkldrung der 12 Kleinen Propheten (Exposition of the 12 Minor 
Prophets). Frankf. 1723. 

Jo. Crericus: Vet. T. Prophete ab Jesaja ad Malachiam usque. Amst. 1781. Folio. 

Br. Π. Gesuarpus: Die 12 Kleinen Propheten. Gesammelt. Frankf. 1737. 4to. [The 
12 Minor Prophets. Compiled. Frankfort. ] 

Ant. Parronus (Rom. Cath.) : Comm.in 12 P.M. Neap. 1743. Folio. 

Pu. Ὁ. Burck: Gnomonin12 P. M. Heilbr. 1753. 4to. 

J. A. Darue: Proph. Min. illustr. Hal. 1773. 

W. Newcome: An attempt towards—of the M. P. Lond. 1785. 4to. 

G. L. BAuER: Die Kleinen Propheten. Lpz. 1786. [The Minor Prophets. Leipzig, 
1786. 

E. ip C. RosENMULLER: Scholia in V. 1.  T. vii. p. 1-4 (ed. pr. Gen. 1788 f.), ed. 3. 
Lips. 1832. 

BaupPeL: Die 12 Kleinen Propheten. Dresd. 1793. [The 12 Minor Prophets. Dresden, 
1793. 

J. ae VatTeER : Observatt. in Locos aliquot Min. Proph. Hal. 1815. 4to. 

J. G. Ercuuorn: Die Hebr. Propheten. Gdétt. 1816 ff. [The Heb. Prophets. Gdtt. 
1816 ff. 

P. = ACKERMANN (Rom. Cath.) : Prophete Min. Vindob. 1830. 

F. Maurer: Comm. Gramm. Histor. Crit. in V. T. Vol. ii. Lips. 1836. 

H. Hesserpere: Die 12 Kl. Proph. Konigsb. 1838. [The 12 Min. Proph. K@nigs- 
berg, 1838.] 

F. Hrrzig: Die 12 Kl. Proph. erkldrt (1 A. 1838) 3 Aufl. Lpz. 1863. [The 12 Min. 
Proph. interpreted 3d. ed. Leipzig, 1863. ] 

H. Ewatp: Die Propheten des A. Bundes. (lst. ed. 1840,) 2d ed. Gott. 1867. [The 
Prophets of the Old Covenant. } 

J. W. C. UmBreit: Praktischer Commentar iiber die Kleinen Propheten. Hamb. 1845. 
[Practical Commentary on the Minor Prophets. Hamb. 1845.] 

P. ScueGG (Rom. Cath.): Die Kleinen Propheten iibersetzt und erkldrt, ἃ ΤῊ. Regensburg, 
1854. [The Minor Prophets translated and explained. 2d Part. Regensburg, 1854. | 

L. REINKE (Rom. Cath.) : Mess. Weiss. bei d. Proph. Giessen, 1859, vol. iii, [Messianic 
Prophecy in the Prophets. Giessen, 1859, vol. iii.] 

C. F. Kem: Biblischer Commentar iiber die Kleinen Propheten. Lpz. 1866. [Biblical 
Commentary on the Minor Prophets. Leipzig, 1866.] Compare also Sixti Senensis Bibl. 
Sancta. Par. 1610. Folio, p. 14 ff. and elsewhere. 

Lup. CapPELLUS (f 1658): Comm. et Note Critice in V. T. cum J. Cappelli observatt. in 
V. T. Amst. 1689. Folio. 

R. Lowtu: De Sacra Poési Hebreorum, ed. J. D. Michaelis. Gott. 1770. 

A. Kurer: Jeremias ll. ss. interpres atque Vindex. Berol. 1837. 

E. B. Pusry, The Minor Prophets, with a Commentary Explanatory and Practical. Ox- 
ford, Cambridge, and London, 1861. 

E. Henperson: The Book of the Twelve Minor Prophets, translated from the Original 
Hebrew. With a Commentary Critical, Philological, and Exegetical. Andover, 1866. 

Henry Cowes: The Minor Prophets, with Notes Critical, Explanatory, and Practical. 
New York, 1867. 

The Works on Introduction, by Carpzov, Eichhorn, Augusti, Bertholdt, De Wette; Jahn, 
Hiivernick, Keil; Stiihelin, and Bleek. 

Herzoa’s Real-encyclopddie, articles “ Obadiah,” “Jonah,” etc., by Ὁ. Nigelsbach, 
Umbreit, and Delitzsch. 

Smitu’s Dictionary of the Bibie (enlarged Am. ed. by Hackett and Abbot), articles under 
she names of the Twelve Minor Prophets respectively. 

Kirro’s Biblical Encyclopedia (third ed. by Wm. L. Alexander), articles under the 
names of the Twelve Minor Prophets respectively. 


48 ΘΕΝΒΑΙ, INTRODUCTION. 


τὴς τ -΄’ἕ -  ---- --- -- ---- -- - -- -- -- - -- 


Il. ῬΗΟΡΗΕΒΤΙΟ THEOLOGY. 


Justinus Martyr: Dialogus cum Tryphone (Opp., ed. Prud. Maranus. Par. 1742 
Folio.) 

Evsepius Cars.: "ExAoyai ἸΠροφητικαὶ, ed. Gaisford. Oxon. 1842. 

Jo. Curysostomus: Sermo de Jona (Opp., ed. Duceus. Francf., 1728. Folio. v. 898. s, 
71), and elsewhere passim in the Homilies. 

Aucustinus: Ep. 102 ad Deogratias. De civit. Dei, 1. xviii. c. 30 ff. Sermo 48. (Opp., 
ed. Bened. Bassan. 1797. 4to. TT. ii, 373 ff. ix., 672 ff. vii. 268 ff. 

Marru. Fuactus Irtyricus: Clavis Scripture Sacre (1567). Lips. 1695. Folio. 

Jo. Coccerus: Summa Theologie ex Scripturis repetita, adjecta Summa Doctrine de Federe 
et Testamento Dei (1648). Gen. 1665. Ato. 

Abr. GuLicuius: Analysis Librorum Propheticorum V. et N. T. Amst. 1681. 4to. 

Cu. A. Crusitus: Hypomnemata ad Theol. Proph. Lips. 1764 ff. 

M. F. Roos: F'ussstapfen des Glaubens Abraham [Footsteps of the Faith of Abraham ] 
Tiib. 1770. 

F. Cu. OrTInGER: Theologia ex Idea Vite. Stutte. 1852. 

J.J. Hess: Vom Reiche Gottes ; ein Versuch tiber den Plan der géttlichen Anstalten und 
Offenbarungen. [Of the Kingdom of God; an essay on the design of the divine institu- 
tions and revelations.| Zirich, 1774. Kern der Lehre vom Reiche Gottes [ Nucleus of the 
Doctrine of the Kingdom of God]. 2 Aufl. [2d ed.] Ziir. 1826. 

E. W. HENGSTENBERG: Christologie des A. T. (1829.) 2 Aufl. [Christology of the Old 
Testament (1829). 2d ed.] Berlin, 1854. 

D. V. CoLtn: Bibl. Theologie [Biblical Theology]. Leipzig, 1836. 

J. Cu. STEUDEL: Vorlesungen tiber die Theologie des A. T.; Herausg. v. Ochler. [Lec- 
tures on the Theology of the Old Testament; edited by Ochler.] Berlin, 1840. 

J. Cu. K. Hormann: Weissagung und Erfiillung. Nord]. 1841. Schriftbeweis. 2 Aufl. 
Nordl. 1857 ff [Prophecy and Fulfillment. Nord]. 1841. Scripture Evidence. 2d ed, 
Noridl. 1857 61. 

J. T. Beck: Christliche Lehrwissenschaft [Christian Scientific Doctrine]. Stuttg. 1841. 

F. De.irzscH: Die Bibl.-prophetische Theologie [Biblico-prophetical Theology]. Leip. 
1845. 

H. A. Cu. HAvernick: Theologie des A. T. [Theology of the Old Testament]. Erlan- 
gen. 1848. 

J. H. Kurtz: Lehrb. d. ἢ. Gesch. 11 A. [Manual of Sacred History, 11th ed.] Kénigs- 
ber, 1864. 

J. H. Sraupt: Fingerzeige in den Inhalt und Zusammenhany der h: Schrift. [Hints on 
the :ontents and connection of Sacred Scripture.] Stuttg. 1854. (2d ed. 1863.) 

W. HorrmMann: Stimmen der Hiiter im 4. Bunde. (Predigten.) [Voices of the herdmen 
in the Old Testament.] Berlin, 1856. 

A. TuoLuck: Die Propheten und ihre Weissagungen. [The Prophets and their Prophe- 
cies.]| Gotha, 1860. 

(0EHLER’S Article on this subject, in Herzog’s Real-Encyclopddie. 


1Π. ἨΟΜΙΠΕΤΙΟΑΙ,. 


Luc. OstanvER’s Bibelwerk: Dutsche Bibel Luther’s mit einer kurzen, jedoch griindli- 
chen Erkldrung, herausg. v. Ὁ). Forster. [The German Bible of Luther with a brief, yet 
thorough exposition, edited by D. Forster.] Stuttg. 1860. 

HeERBorn’scHE Bibel. (Von Piscator). 1617 ff. 

H. Horcu: Mystische und Prophetische Bibel. [Mystical and Prophetic Bible.] Marb. 
1712. 

J. M. pe tA Morne Guyon: Les Livres de ’ Ancien Testament avec des Explanations et 
Reflerions qui regardent ἃ la Vie Interieure. [The books of the Old Testament with expla- 
nations and reflections, which concern the inner life.] Ed. P. Poiret. Col. (Amst.) 1715, 

BERLEBURGER Bibel. 1726 ff. 

Cu. M. Prarriscue Bibel. Tiib. 1729. 


GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 49 


Jou. Lance: Biblia Parenthetica. Lips. 1748. 

J. G. StarKE: Synopsis, Biblioth, Exeg. Lips. 1747, vol. 5. 

J. D. Micwae is: Deutsche Uebersetzung des A. T. mit Anmerkungen fiir Ungelehrte 
[German translation of the Old Testament, with notes for the unlearned.] Gott. 1782. 

ΒΕ, Hezex: Die Bibel A. u. N. T. mit Erkldrenden Anmerkungen. [The Bible, Old and 
New Testament, with explanatory notes.] Lemgo, 1786. 

Εν v. Meyer: Die h. Schrift mit Anmerkungen. [The Holy Scripture, with notes. | 
(1819), 3d ed. Frankft. 1855. 4to. 

F. G. Lisco: Das A. 7. mit Erklérungen, Einleitungen, ete., 2 Aufl. [The Old Testament, 
with explanations and introductions, etc., 2d ed.] Berl. 1863. 

Epwarps and Park: Bibl. Sacra T. V. New York and London. 1848, 

CaLwER Bibel. Stuttg. 1849. T. 1. 

O. V. Gertacu: Das A. T. mit Anmerkungen. Bd.iv. Abth. 2. Von Schmieder. [The 
Old Testament with notes. Vol. iv. Part. 2, by Schmieder]. Berlin, 1853. 


Sermons and Devotional Expositions. 


R. GuattHer: Homilice in XII. Proph. Minn. Tig. 1563. 

Anpr. Kunap: Comm. Exegetico-practicus in XII. p. Minn. Dresd. 1677. 4to. 

J. J. BAULER, Prophetisches Mark und Kern, d. i. 68 Predigten iiber alle Capitel der 12 
Kleinen Propheten. [ Prophetical Marrow and Kernel, i. e., 68 sermons on all the chapters 
of the 12 Minor Prophets.] Ulm, 1699. 4to. 

C. H. Rircer (} 1791) : Kurze Betrachtungen iiber die 12 Kleinen Prcpheten. [Brief medi- 
tations upon the 12 Minor Prophets.] Stuttg. 1835. 

J. SCHLIER : Die 12 Kleinen Propheten. [The 12 Minor Prophets.] Stuttg. 1861. 


ἃ 


έν. ¢ : 
, ᾧ ὦ 


ao hed 


yp Any 
malt aaa 
il a onda 
ve 


‘ 


Ψ 


PT νυνὶ 


~ 


—T-w-s ὦ oe he 


a 


Gi. 


ra i 
Kiki 
᾿ 


Date Due 


4 -- 4 mR 
x - τ' 
- ΕΞ 
[ ἰδ cas pote 
7 te 


@ JY 20°55] 


ooo 


BS494 .L276 v.14 c.2 
Ἢ si or to the Alene 


0 


1 1012 00039 4017 


